4WD
$50 site donor 2024
And most of them are lawyers …
FCC Repealed Net Neutrality Today
- Thread starter LoneRanger
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: HemiHawk
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Originally Posted By: HemiHawk
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Originally Posted By: HemiHawk
alarmguy said:
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
Here’s What Getting Rid Of Net Neutrality Will Do To Netflix
“Netflix acknowledged long ago that these kinds of costs of delivering streaming video are minimal to their bottom line,” William Rinehart, director of technology and innovation policy at the American Action Forum, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “Moreover, they announced a month before this new regulation was released that they were going to raise prices to develop more content. Content development is driving cost increases on platforms, not this simple regulatory change.”
I have no problem with Netflix charging more for increased content. They are so inexpensive as it is....tem bucks or more a month is fine if the product reflects the increase.
As for this thread of doomsayers? Kind of comical. I against government control of just about everything. Let the market decide what works and leave it at that. Yes, rough patches will occur for a while but eventually these things settle rather quickly when the consumer decides what they are willing to pay for.
Here’s What Getting Rid Of Net Neutrality Will Do To Netflix
“Netflix acknowledged long ago that these kinds of costs of delivering streaming video are minimal to their bottom line,” William Rinehart, director of technology and innovation policy at the American Action Forum, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “Moreover, they announced a month before this new regulation was released that they were going to raise prices to develop more content. Content development is driving cost increases on platforms, not this simple regulatory change.”
I have no problem with Netflix charging more for increased content. They are so inexpensive as it is....tem bucks or more a month is fine if the product reflects the increase.
As for this thread of doomsayers? Kind of comical. I against government control of just about everything. Let the market decide what works and leave it at that. Yes, rough patches will occur for a while but eventually these things settle rather quickly when the consumer decides what they are willing to pay for.
Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
Here’s What Getting Rid Of Net Neutrality Will Do To Netflix
“Netflix acknowledged long ago that these kinds of costs of delivering streaming video are minimal to their bottom line,” William Rinehart, director of technology and innovation policy at the American Action Forum, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “Moreover, they announced a month before this new regulation was released that they were going to raise prices to develop more content. Content development is driving cost increases on platforms, not this simple regulatory change.”
I have no problem with Netflix charging more for increased content. They are so inexpensive as it is....tem bucks or more a month is fine if the product reflects the increase.
As for this thread of doomsayers? Kind of comical. I against government control of just about everything. Let the market decide what works and leave it at that. Yes, rough patches will occur for a while but eventually these things settle rather quickly when the consumer decides what they are willing to pay for.
^^^^ Exactly ^^^^
Thank you, at least I know there are others.
My god, people want mommy and daddy politician to control every aspect of their lives against all the evils in the world and big bad companies.
Thing is, mommy and daddy politicians are the most evil of all evils when you look to them to control your life. The less power they have, the more freedom you have.
If you dont like the price of something, dont buy it.
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
Here’s What Getting Rid Of Net Neutrality Will Do To Netflix
“Netflix acknowledged long ago that these kinds of costs of delivering streaming video are minimal to their bottom line,” William Rinehart, director of technology and innovation policy at the American Action Forum, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “Moreover, they announced a month before this new regulation was released that they were going to raise prices to develop more content. Content development is driving cost increases on platforms, not this simple regulatory change.”
I have no problem with Netflix charging more for increased content. They are so inexpensive as it is....tem bucks or more a month is fine if the product reflects the increase.
As for this thread of doomsayers? Kind of comical. I against government control of just about everything. Let the market decide what works and leave it at that. Yes, rough patches will occur for a while but eventually these things settle rather quickly when the consumer decides what they are willing to pay for.
^^^^ Exactly ^^^^
Thank you, at least I know there are others.
My god, people want mommy and daddy politician to control every aspect of their lives against all the evils in the world and big bad companies.
Thing is, mommy and daddy politicians are the most evil of all evils when you look to them to control your life. The less power they have, the more freedom you have.
If you dont like the price of something, dont buy it.
Originally Posted By: alarmguy
Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
Here’s What Getting Rid Of Net Neutrality Will Do To Netflix
“Netflix acknowledged long ago that these kinds of costs of delivering streaming video are minimal to their bottom line,” William Rinehart, director of technology and innovation policy at the American Action Forum, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “Moreover, they announced a month before this new regulation was released that they were going to raise prices to develop more content. Content development is driving cost increases on platforms, not this simple regulatory change.”
I have no problem with Netflix charging more for increased content. They are so inexpensive as it is....tem bucks or more a month is fine if the product reflects the increase.
As for this thread of doomsayers? Kind of comical. I against government control of just about everything. Let the market decide what works and leave it at that. Yes, rough patches will occur for a while but eventually these things settle rather quickly when the consumer decides what they are willing to pay for.
^^^^ Exactly ^^^^
Thank you, at least I know there are others.
My god, people want mommy and daddy politician to control every aspect of their lives against all the evils in the world and big bad companies.
Thing is, mommy and daddy politicians are the most evil of all evils when you look to them to control your life. The less power they have, the more freedom you have.
If you don't like the price of something, dont buy it.
Yes...people these days seem to think the government is somehow benevolent and looking out for them. Foolish.
Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
Here’s What Getting Rid Of Net Neutrality Will Do To Netflix
“Netflix acknowledged long ago that these kinds of costs of delivering streaming video are minimal to their bottom line,” William Rinehart, director of technology and innovation policy at the American Action Forum, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “Moreover, they announced a month before this new regulation was released that they were going to raise prices to develop more content. Content development is driving cost increases on platforms, not this simple regulatory change.”
I have no problem with Netflix charging more for increased content. They are so inexpensive as it is....tem bucks or more a month is fine if the product reflects the increase.
As for this thread of doomsayers? Kind of comical. I against government control of just about everything. Let the market decide what works and leave it at that. Yes, rough patches will occur for a while but eventually these things settle rather quickly when the consumer decides what they are willing to pay for.
^^^^ Exactly ^^^^
Thank you, at least I know there are others.
My god, people want mommy and daddy politician to control every aspect of their lives against all the evils in the world and big bad companies.
Thing is, mommy and daddy politicians are the most evil of all evils when you look to them to control your life. The less power they have, the more freedom you have.
If you don't like the price of something, dont buy it.
Yes...people these days seem to think the government is somehow benevolent and looking out for them. Foolish.
The internet wasn't broken before and I did not notice any difference when it was enacted, and don't expect any difference if it's repealed.
The regulations didn't do anything for me. I live in a rural area with limited access to the internet. Dialup, wifi, satellite or 4G LTE. All expensive at around $55 a month just to start.
I had the wifi and they even had a local tower within a 1/2 miles. But they oversold it and they gave preference to those downloading large files such as movies. I tried the Amazon fire stick but it was only good half the time as far as performance.
Now have the Verizon Jetpack 4G LTE and it is speed limited per plan as well as data quantity per billing cycle. I get slowed down to 3g/600mbps after a 15G data limit is hit, usually after three weeks. The advantage to this plan, which I assume Verizon miscalculated, is there are no data limits or speed restrictions on my phone where as before there was.
So why should not those who want to download movies or stream data pay higher fees than one who just wants to surf the net?
I had the wifi and they even had a local tower within a 1/2 miles. But they oversold it and they gave preference to those downloading large files such as movies. I tried the Amazon fire stick but it was only good half the time as far as performance.
Now have the Verizon Jetpack 4G LTE and it is speed limited per plan as well as data quantity per billing cycle. I get slowed down to 3g/600mbps after a 15G data limit is hit, usually after three weeks. The advantage to this plan, which I assume Verizon miscalculated, is there are no data limits or speed restrictions on my phone where as before there was.
So why should not those who want to download movies or stream data pay higher fees than one who just wants to surf the net?
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Government isn't automatically bad. In this case the FCC says the ISPs can't monkey with what websites you choose to access, or hand control over to Comcast...
I just hope child labor laws are repealed next. Its really limiting innovation and creativity. No way corporations would take advantage. "mommy and daddy" government are really getting in the way.
Government isn't automatically bad. In this case the FCC says the ISPs can't monkey with what websites you choose to access, or hand control over to Comcast...
I just hope child labor laws are repealed next. Its really limiting innovation and creativity. No way corporations would take advantage. "mommy and daddy" government are really getting in the way.
Things were not fine back before 2015. If you use cable internet during peak hour it is slower than DSL. Basically what they said is you abuse your internet despite them claiming these ridiculous high speed, and they'll disconnect you for abusing the "shared" high speed.
The definition of abuse: anything big you try to download, and anything video.
The definition of abuse: anything big you try to download, and anything video.
Originally Posted By: alarmguy
The one and only time I will respond to a retarded comment on one of my posts.
The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA LEAD THE WORLD IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTERNET AND THE SUCCESS OF WHAT IT IS TODAY.
All on its own, without greedy politicians having big companies lining their pockets with money. Through Net Neutrality the Politicians can start to line their pockets with special interests groups giving them money to create exemptions and laws benefiting those companies, well, thank god its being ended, back to hands off the internet.
Why on freaking earth do people think government will make things cheaper. Just plain STUPID.
You know where internet came from right? It was a military project called ARPA net. And lead the world in the development? I think we are behind, and we typically get lower speed and pay more for that. Anyways, we are used to it and don't think much about it which is fine too.
From now on you have to bundle either cable TV or land line to your internet or you pay the same price, because, government is not regulating it anymore. Don't laugh, it was how it is back in the days when phone companies got a monopoly on DSL and cable companies got a monopoly on cable internet.
The one and only time I will respond to a retarded comment on one of my posts.
The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA LEAD THE WORLD IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTERNET AND THE SUCCESS OF WHAT IT IS TODAY.
All on its own, without greedy politicians having big companies lining their pockets with money. Through Net Neutrality the Politicians can start to line their pockets with special interests groups giving them money to create exemptions and laws benefiting those companies, well, thank god its being ended, back to hands off the internet.
Why on freaking earth do people think government will make things cheaper. Just plain STUPID.
You know where internet came from right? It was a military project called ARPA net. And lead the world in the development? I think we are behind, and we typically get lower speed and pay more for that. Anyways, we are used to it and don't think much about it which is fine too.
From now on you have to bundle either cable TV or land line to your internet or you pay the same price, because, government is not regulating it anymore. Don't laugh, it was how it is back in the days when phone companies got a monopoly on DSL and cable companies got a monopoly on cable internet.
An example:
The government takes tax dollars and builds lots of infrastructure, including toll roads. Government bureaucrats charge vehicles based on their number of axles because bigger and heavier vehicles cause more damage. Semis, buses, and campers are charged more than cars. Is that fair? Using the net neutrality concept, why should vehicles that demand more infrastructure maintenance be charged more? Why should poor or middle-class people with campers be charged more than rich people with Mercedeses? Where are the consumer advocates demanding toll road neutrality?
Wealthy content-providers like Facebook and Google charge less per hit for large advertisers than they do for companies that get fewer hits. Why should demand and supply or volume determine the price? Why should smaller, poorer companies be charged more per hit? We need a pay-per-click neutrality law.
The government takes tax dollars and builds lots of infrastructure, including toll roads. Government bureaucrats charge vehicles based on their number of axles because bigger and heavier vehicles cause more damage. Semis, buses, and campers are charged more than cars. Is that fair? Using the net neutrality concept, why should vehicles that demand more infrastructure maintenance be charged more? Why should poor or middle-class people with campers be charged more than rich people with Mercedeses? Where are the consumer advocates demanding toll road neutrality?
Wealthy content-providers like Facebook and Google charge less per hit for large advertisers than they do for companies that get fewer hits. Why should demand and supply or volume determine the price? Why should smaller, poorer companies be charged more per hit? We need a pay-per-click neutrality law.
The answer depends on your political philosophy. If you think people are to be treated equally, then you don't charge based on wealth, you charge people for what they use.
If you think people are to be treated differently based on their wealth, then you can have all sorts of permutations and combinations of treatment.
I have no problem with people making special deals for the rich or the poor. As long as they are personally doing it, and not choosing to do so on behalf of the entire nation that is.
We run into problems, at both ends of the spectrum, when others decide they are the arbiters of the greater good and decide for you how it should be done.
That's probably about all I can say without getting mired in the verboten political realm. Acknowledging there are differing political views, but not siding with any particular view.
Frankly, I think they all leave a lot to be desired
Originally Posted By: loneryder
An example:
The government takes tax dollars and builds lots of infrastructure, including toll roads. Government bureaucrats charge vehicles based on their number of axles because bigger and heavier vehicles cause more damage. Semis, buses, and campers are charged more than cars. Is that fair? Using the net neutrality concept, why should vehicles that demand more infrastructure maintenance be charged more? Why should poor or middle-class people with campers be charged more than rich people with Mercedeses? Where are the consumer advocates demanding toll road neutrality?
Wealthy content-providers like Facebook and Google charge less per hit for large advertisers than they do for companies that get fewer hits. Why should demand and supply or volume determine the price? Why should smaller, poorer companies be charged more per hit? We need a pay-per-click neutrality law.
If you think people are to be treated differently based on their wealth, then you can have all sorts of permutations and combinations of treatment.
I have no problem with people making special deals for the rich or the poor. As long as they are personally doing it, and not choosing to do so on behalf of the entire nation that is.
We run into problems, at both ends of the spectrum, when others decide they are the arbiters of the greater good and decide for you how it should be done.
That's probably about all I can say without getting mired in the verboten political realm. Acknowledging there are differing political views, but not siding with any particular view.
Frankly, I think they all leave a lot to be desired
Originally Posted By: loneryder
An example:
The government takes tax dollars and builds lots of infrastructure, including toll roads. Government bureaucrats charge vehicles based on their number of axles because bigger and heavier vehicles cause more damage. Semis, buses, and campers are charged more than cars. Is that fair? Using the net neutrality concept, why should vehicles that demand more infrastructure maintenance be charged more? Why should poor or middle-class people with campers be charged more than rich people with Mercedeses? Where are the consumer advocates demanding toll road neutrality?
Wealthy content-providers like Facebook and Google charge less per hit for large advertisers than they do for companies that get fewer hits. Why should demand and supply or volume determine the price? Why should smaller, poorer companies be charged more per hit? We need a pay-per-click neutrality law.
Originally Posted By: HemiHawk
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Government isn't automatically bad. In this case the FCC says the ISPs can't monkey with what websites you choose to access, or hand control over to Comcast...
I just hope child labor laws are repealed next. Its really limiting innovation and creativity. No way corporations would take advantage. "mommy and daddy" government are really getting in the way.
Great analogy...internet to child labor laws. One has ZERO to do with the other. Big difference between limited government (as the framers intended) and not having basic laws.
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Government isn't automatically bad. In this case the FCC says the ISPs can't monkey with what websites you choose to access, or hand control over to Comcast...
I just hope child labor laws are repealed next. Its really limiting innovation and creativity. No way corporations would take advantage. "mommy and daddy" government are really getting in the way.
Great analogy...internet to child labor laws. One has ZERO to do with the other. Big difference between limited government (as the framers intended) and not having basic laws.
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Originally Posted By: alarmguy
The one and only time I will respond to a retarded comment on one of my posts.
The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA LEAD THE WORLD IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTERNET AND THE SUCCESS OF WHAT IT IS TODAY.
All on its own, without greedy politicians having big companies lining their pockets with money. Through Net Neutrality the Politicians can start to line their pockets with special interests groups giving them money to create exemptions and laws benefiting those companies, well, thank god its being ended, back to hands off the internet.
Why on freaking earth do people think government will make things cheaper. Just plain STUPID.
You kn...
From now on you have to bundle either cable TV or land line to your internet or you pay the same price, because, government is not regulating it anymore. Don't laugh, it was how it is back in the days when phone companies got a monopoly on DSL and cable companies got a monopoly on cable internet.
Completely false, you do not have to bundle anything and you do not pay the same price, also let's keep in mind the government has only regulated the internet for 2 years, now their chance to screw it up has been ruined with the repeal.
Originally Posted By: alarmguy
The one and only time I will respond to a retarded comment on one of my posts.
The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA LEAD THE WORLD IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTERNET AND THE SUCCESS OF WHAT IT IS TODAY.
All on its own, without greedy politicians having big companies lining their pockets with money. Through Net Neutrality the Politicians can start to line their pockets with special interests groups giving them money to create exemptions and laws benefiting those companies, well, thank god its being ended, back to hands off the internet.
Why on freaking earth do people think government will make things cheaper. Just plain STUPID.
You kn...
From now on you have to bundle either cable TV or land line to your internet or you pay the same price, because, government is not regulating it anymore. Don't laugh, it was how it is back in the days when phone companies got a monopoly on DSL and cable companies got a monopoly on cable internet.
Completely false, you do not have to bundle anything and you do not pay the same price, also let's keep in mind the government has only regulated the internet for 2 years, now their chance to screw it up has been ruined with the repeal.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: MrHorspwer
Comcast owns NBC Universal,
Ha! This explains NBC's Seth Meyers' anti-neutrality/pro-Pai monologue last night while his Comedy Central/Viacom peers made very clear anti-repeal/pro-neutrality jokes on their editions. I was wondering which telecom sleeps with NBC
Isn't it funny how 'opinions' correlate directly with financial interests?
Comcast owns NBC Universal,
Ha! This explains NBC's Seth Meyers' anti-neutrality/pro-Pai monologue last night while his Comedy Central/Viacom peers made very clear anti-repeal/pro-neutrality jokes on their editions. I was wondering which telecom sleeps with NBC
Originally Posted By: PeterPolyol
Originally Posted By: MrHorspwer
Comcast owns NBC Universal,
Ha! This explains NBC's Seth Meyers' anti-neutrality/pro-Pai monologue last night while his Comedy Central/Viacom peers made very clear anti-repeal/pro-neutrality jokes on their editions. I was wondering which telecom sleeps with NBC
Isn't it funny how 'opinions' correlate directly with financial interests?
What are you talking about? There was nothing 'pro' about anything he said or has EVER said about Net Neutrality or Pai himself.
You're spreading disinformation and stirring the pot. You've pulled it directly out of your hindquarters. You're lying. Nice try.
Originally Posted By: MrHorspwer
Comcast owns NBC Universal,
Ha! This explains NBC's Seth Meyers' anti-neutrality/pro-Pai monologue last night while his Comedy Central/Viacom peers made very clear anti-repeal/pro-neutrality jokes on their editions. I was wondering which telecom sleeps with NBC
What are you talking about? There was nothing 'pro' about anything he said or has EVER said about Net Neutrality or Pai himself.
You're spreading disinformation and stirring the pot. You've pulled it directly out of your hindquarters. You're lying. Nice try.
Your post here shows that you miss the point entirely.
I guess you'd say that if the ratepayers don't like the cost of electricity then they shouldn't buy it.
ISPs are no more than utilities and should be regulated as such.
There is no shame in regulation. We haven't had a truly free economy here with open competition since well before the founding of our republic.
Anyone who proclaims that "the market" is somehow the arbiter of business success or failure as well as consumer choice is seriously ignorant.
Government has been picking winners and losers here for a couple of centuries and this FCC vote is only the most recent example of that.
I guess you'd say that if the ratepayers don't like the cost of electricity then they shouldn't buy it.
ISPs are no more than utilities and should be regulated as such.
There is no shame in regulation. We haven't had a truly free economy here with open competition since well before the founding of our republic.
Anyone who proclaims that "the market" is somehow the arbiter of business success or failure as well as consumer choice is seriously ignorant.
Government has been picking winners and losers here for a couple of centuries and this FCC vote is only the most recent example of that.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Your post here shows that you miss the point entirely.
I guess you'd say that if the ratepayers don't like the cost of electricity then they shouldn't buy it.
ISPs are no more than utilities and should be regulated as such.
There is no shame in regulation. We haven't had a truly free economy here with open competition since well before the founding of our republic.
Anyone who proclaims that "the market" is somehow the arbiter of business success or failure as well as consumer choice is seriously ignorant.
Government has been picking winners and losers here for a couple of centuries and this FCC vote is only the most recent example of that.
Your post here shows that you miss the point entirely.
I guess you'd say that if the ratepayers don't like the cost of electricity then they shouldn't buy it.
ISPs are no more than utilities and should be regulated as such.
There is no shame in regulation. We haven't had a truly free economy here with open competition since well before the founding of our republic.
Anyone who proclaims that "the market" is somehow the arbiter of business success or failure as well as consumer choice is seriously ignorant.
Government has been picking winners and losers here for a couple of centuries and this FCC vote is only the most recent example of that.
Where was the FCC when Verizon and AT&T ( both former baby Bells ) were gobbling up every little to medium size local cell company, making them the behemoths they are now?
The FCC and the Justice Department allowed the creation of these monsters, assuming, for the sake of argument, that's what they are. Not sure why anyone would trust the creator of the beast to be the only one that can slay it.
If some point to point wireless provider pops up in my town at a better price than cable, I'd be interested in it. And that's exactly what will happen if the other providers get too expensive.
The FCC and the Justice Department allowed the creation of these monsters, assuming, for the sake of argument, that's what they are. Not sure why anyone would trust the creator of the beast to be the only one that can slay it.
If some point to point wireless provider pops up in my town at a better price than cable, I'd be interested in it. And that's exactly what will happen if the other providers get too expensive.
- Status
