You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 05, 2016, 06:56:32 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!  (Read 865 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Garuss VakarianTopic starter

EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« on: May 23, 2014, 05:52:13 PM »
This is really important. I can not express this enough. If the internet matters to you. If you dont want to lose youtube, simple searches, or even Eliquiy! Watch this. And help fight! What do I mean? Net nuetrality is under risk. It is a law, wich allows us to use the internet. It is what makes the internet 'free reign.' It is what allows us to make sites, and be independant. To search what we want, when we want to. Wihout it, suspect Pay wall after PAY WALL, and a whole bunch of head ache. I cant really explain this. I am not the best. But please watch these videos. Let AlphaOmegaSin do the talking. And then, if you care. Follow the link to the form. Sine wavers, talk about it, and fight it, and fight this BS!

Why you should Care:



What you should do. And how/where to do it!




http://gizmodo.com/how-to-yell-at-the-fcc-about-how-much-you-hate-its-net-1576943170?utm_campaign=socialflow_gizmodo_facebook&utm_source=gizmodo_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow


This link is to file a complaint to the fcc.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/upload/display?z=suh7g

Again. This is not some joke. This is a legit problem that is under handedly being played by our government. So, sine wavers, and talk about it. I know I will. This is not some debate. Not some topic on the issue. (Feel free to discuss though.) I am simply giving the shout out, for those who may care.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2014, 06:00:25 PM by Garuss Vakarian »

Offline Iniquitous

Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #1 on: May 23, 2014, 09:00:39 PM »
First - Do you even know what it would mean if net neutrality went bye bye?

I do. It would mean that broadband companies (Verizon, Charter, Comcast) would be able to give certain companies faster internet speeds based upon content and willingness to pay more for it. It's not going to mean things like youtube and Elliquiy will simply vanish off the face of the internet.

Second - this has been going on for awhile now. The sad truth is not a lot of people know about net neutrality and what the FCC is proposing - mainly because the media has not done a lot of coverage on it. The other thing to keep in mind is, despite the thousands upon thousands flooding the government and FCC with protests, it is still moving forward. I hate to be a negative nancy over here, but if the corporations want it, chances are really good they are going to get what they want.

Also, to quote Vekseid from a thread I made earlier about net neutrality:

For the record, 'network neutrality' does not affect Elliquiy in the slightest. For everything, the US has been pretty big on the freedom of speech, and this is reflected in a lot of both legal and corporate culture. I wouldn't dare host Elliquiy from anywhere in the British Commonwealth or European Union.

This will probably not get overturned on appeal - the judge couldn't make a ruling any other way. The better solution is to lobby for the regulation to be put into place, or to ensure a separation of content providers, backbone providers, and end-connectivity providers. It's not like Google, Netflix, Microsoft, Facebook, and the like are nobodies. By their very nature these are extremely powerful companies with their own resources to fight this fight, since they're the ones whose bottom line risks the greatest impact.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2014, 09:07:45 PM by Iniquitous Opheliac »

Offline Garuss VakarianTopic starter

Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #2 on: May 23, 2014, 09:42:26 PM »
I see. Well, first. I am not going to debate you. I just am not good at debates. I suck at them. Which is why I developed a more. "Well, thats your opinion. Now lets go play Magic the gatherine!" kind of personality towards the subject. :P . Any way though. I never meant to mean that it will go away. Your right it wont. You tube will stay, and eliquiy may to. But the prices to run them will go way higher. Leaving nothing more then the sites that are higher in demand, or in earnings. In theory at least. Most lower end sites wont be able to afford to keep their sites. And, that is most. Not all. (Trying to keep myself from being conclusive. I dont KNOW.) None the less. I understand your opinion, even though it is negative. (:( Corporations I guess will get there way.) But, is it better to at the very least tell them no? For at least your personal pride? Since, on the other side. They only win, when you let them. None the less. I dont normally like debating. So I wont. This thread was just me sending out the good word, in case it has not. And to allow others to speak. I for one, am against taking out nuetrality.


 Well, as I said in my first post. I am not the best at explaining my own beliefs, or thoughts. Despite being a role player. Which is why I tend to stay clear of hard subjects, and such. (Unless role playing.) So take what I say by a grain of salt. I may just be saying ignorant things right now. Which is something I definitely dont like to do. All I have to say is. If your worried, or you care. The links to do something, are up there. ^^ None the less. Have a nice day.

Offline Iniquitous

Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #3 on: May 23, 2014, 09:56:01 PM »
As I was explaining to someone else, it is going to have to be the major players (Google, Amazon, Yahoo, etc) to take up this fight. I do not see petitions from the common man doing anything at all. It seems like it will have to come down to money vs money - in other words, big companies willing to fight in court against other big companies with money.

Also, not sure if you are aware of this, but this section of the forum is for debating so anything posted here is debated upon (though, you certainly do not have to do more than post the topic and step back so everyone else can debate it!).

Oh, and for the record - I certainly do not agree with taking away net neutrality. With that said, I can certainly understand WHY broadband companies want to do away with it. One word. Money. They operate their companies for that one reason and if they find a way to make more of it, they are definitely going to go for it.

Offline Vekseid

Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #4 on: May 24, 2014, 01:53:05 AM »
A different angle to attack this sort of situation from would be the local monopoly power that major ISPs have managed to secure for themselves. This wouldn't even be relevant if major ISPs actually had competition.

Offline Scribbles

Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #5 on: May 24, 2014, 04:14:32 AM »
A different angle to attack this sort of situation from would be the local monopoly power that major ISPs have managed to secure for themselves. This wouldn't even be relevant if major ISPs actually had competition.

That seems to be the issue with most companies these days, the lack of competition. I know many countries try to quash monopolies or encourage competition at the very least but such efforts by government seem to have lessened over the years. Some countries are even attempting to bolster their own monopolies, in a strange twist.

I'm drifting off topic though...

I'm not too familiar on Net Neutrality to comment on it but I've always enjoyed one of the ways I've heard it described. Some have likened the internet to your modern day wild west and pointed out that what we're seeing (the rise of e-corporates, staking of claims and mapping of a once clustered mess) is just another phase and, once it has passed, we'll simply grow accustomed to the new phase and forget the freedoms we might have enjoyed in the previous one. Perhaps the lack of a Net Neutrality might even bring some comforts to ease the transition.

My only concern with that analogy is that it falls apart when you consider that it's not a government, looking to bring order and fairness, which is gradually staking its claim on the entire net but rather a group of corporates looking to rake in the cash.

Offline Sethala

Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #6 on: May 25, 2014, 09:38:00 PM »
I agree with Veks, the issue isn't just what they can start charging people more for, it's that the major internet companies have monopolized whatever section of the country they're providing service to.  If I think Walmart's car repair shop is crappy and overpriced, I can bring my car to another shop that'll do better work and/or do it for less, meaning Walmart has to fix their prices and service so that people go to them instead of the other shops.  With internet, if Comcast is a horrible service, my options are pretty much "suck it up" or "don't have internet", so they can do whatever underhanded practices they want.  (Note that while several major cell phone carriers also offer wireless internet service, it's not a very viable solution for a lot of the new internet technologies coming out due to spectrum crunch.)

Further, it's worth noting that most major ISPs (especially the big two, Time Warner and Comcast) are also cable network companies.  Their competition isn't just other ISPs (which are next to nonexistent), it's other forms of entertainment, especially video sites - Youtube, Netflix, etc.  Giving the ISPs the ability to control how fast data from each site goes is like telling Walmart it can be in control of highway maintenance for a city - expect excellent roads leading to Walmart, and absolutely no maintenance on the roads leading to Target.

Finally, the last thing I'll say: despite what the corporations say they will and won't do without Net Neutrality, the main reason I can see for keeping it is because there's a risk that someone will take advantage of it if it's gone, and I see no good reason to not keep it around.

Offline Iniquitous

Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #7 on: May 25, 2014, 11:28:09 PM »
As a side note here - comcast has purchased Time Warner and wil be splitting customers with Charter. The two big cable companies now is Comcast and AT&T with Charter right behind. Though I suspect soon they will be bought out. (AT&T just purchased DirectTv.. or Dish, cant remember which.)

Offline Tsenta

Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #8 on: May 27, 2014, 01:00:27 PM »
Could be worse. You could be like me where all there is available. Is dialup. Period.

Offline Chris Brady

Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #9 on: May 29, 2014, 07:10:22 AM »
No, Crabby, what's worse is people like you no longer having internet.  Ever again.  Because you're simply no longer important.  To give you the Comcast style service would require sending out teams to do an assessment of what type of system necessary to make it work.  Then getting the materials to build the infrastructure.  And then they have to weigh that (and more that I'm forgetting, like manpower to maintain) compared to how much money that'll come in.  And if they haven't done it by now, then odds are you're little neck of the woods isn't financially viable enough.

And so, they'll just cut you off.  And no one will care.

Offline Cheka Man

Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #10 on: June 04, 2014, 01:16:57 AM »
It won't kill the whole internet-but it will make it much more expensive.

Offline Iniquitous

Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #11 on: June 04, 2014, 01:32:01 AM »
No.

This is not going to raise rates for customers. It will raise the rates companies pay - if they can afford to pay for a high tier (faster speed for streaming to the company's customers) then all is good. If they can't afford the higher tier, well then they would lose out.

This benefits companies like Netflix, Google, Yahoo, Bing (who by the way are all on board with this last I read) because it keeps start up companies from being able to truly compete with them.

Online Callie Del Noire

Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #12 on: June 11, 2014, 03:39:07 PM »
No.

This is not going to raise rates for customers. It will raise the rates companies pay - if they can afford to pay for a high tier (faster speed for streaming to the company's customers) then all is good. If they can't afford the higher tier, well then they would lose out.

This benefits companies like Netflix, Google, Yahoo, Bing (who by the way are all on board with this last I read) because it keeps start up companies from being able to truly compete with them.

Netflix isn't 'on board', they are paying because at least short term it's the cost of doing business. They put up a site to implicitly show how much throttling of offered services is being done.  The issue is this.. none of the 'big net businesses' would have made it to their current level if 'throttling' and 'preferential treatment' had been the norm back in their beginning days would they?

Offline Wheeler97

Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #13 on: June 23, 2014, 10:43:21 AM »
No.

This is not going to raise rates for customers. It will raise the rates companies pay - if they can afford to pay for a high tier (faster speed for streaming to the company's customers) then all is good. If they can't afford the higher tier, well then they would lose out.

This benefits companies like Netflix, Google, Yahoo, Bing (who by the way are all on board with this last I read) because it keeps start up companies from being able to truly compete with them.

Ummm... Business Sense 101... When a company pays more for their services, who covers that cost? Their customers do, in the form of higher prices or lost value of service. Comcast was slowing Netflix's service by as much as 25% in January. When Netflix caved in March and accepted the deal, their speeds accelerated to the point that they were increasing 24% more than they had been in September.

Large, established companies that have a customer base that will accept the new rates will be able to afford the faster speeds. Smaller start-ups will be kept down.

Cable/Internet providers are trying to argue that the businesses that use more bandwidth (Netflix, Youtube and the like are a huge portion) should pay more for that bandwidth. All they want to do is make society accept that they (the providers) don't want to keep investing to upgrade their infrastructure. They would rather prioritize users.

Online Callie Del Noire

Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #14 on: June 23, 2014, 11:08:34 AM »
Ummm... Business Sense 101... When a company pays more for their services, who covers that cost? Their customers do, in the form of higher prices or lost value of service. Comcast was slowing Netflix's service by as much as 25% in January. When Netflix caved in March and accepted the deal, their speeds accelerated to the point that they were increasing 24% more than they had been in September.

Large, established companies that have a customer base that will accept the new rates will be able to afford the faster speeds. Smaller start-ups will be kept down.

Cable/Internet providers are trying to argue that the businesses that use more bandwidth (Netflix, Youtube and the like are a huge portion) should pay more for that bandwidth. All they want to do is make society accept that they (the providers) don't want to keep investing to upgrade their infrastructure. They would rather prioritize users.

Problem is.. the providers AREN'T investing in their infrastructure. We are behind almost ALL of western Europe in average bandwidth. I had better (and cheaper) bandwidth via Votaphone in Spain and Sciliy (and for a few weeks I was there.. Greece) than I've had in the US ever. Even accounting for nearly a 2:1 euro:dollar ratio I was paying less for more. My airmen who live in Japan, and Korean are getting even BETTER service than that. I had.. TWO outages in 2 years of service in Spain. TWO. One of which involved someone taking out the switching station that killed service for the entire town. One an 'average' week here I can have up to 10 drop outs during the day and as many (if not more) during the nights/weekends.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #15 on: June 23, 2014, 11:12:54 AM »
I think that's precisely what Wheeler was saying.  By 'prioritizing users', they can keep the same infrastructure for longer (since fewer people will be given access to the high-grade stuff) and pocket the extra cash.

Online Callie Del Noire

Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #16 on: June 23, 2014, 11:37:16 AM »
I think that's precisely what Wheeler was saying.  By 'prioritizing users', they can keep the same infrastructure for longer (since fewer people will be given access to the high-grade stuff) and pocket the extra cash.

I find it embarrassing that as the country that is largely responsible for the foundation of the Internet that we've let greed and opportunism kill it here. Particularly as moves against Net Neutrality are clearly self-defeating. You are a big company.. you expand by buying start ups (Microsoft, Apple, Google, anyone?) it's in your best interest to push for an open marketplace where a new 'out of the box' product can grow in the wild.

Offline Valthazar

  • Writer ͏͏● Educator ● Gamer ● Roleplayer ● Debater ● Tech Connoisseur ● Gym Rat ● Procrastinator ● As they say, "A simple PM may lead to lifelong friendship" ▬▬▬▬
  • Suspended
  • Seducer
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2013
  • Location: United States
  • Gender: Male
  • Proceed and be bold. Embrace your insecurities.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!!!! NET NEUTRALITY AT RISK!
« Reply #17 on: July 10, 2014, 01:07:46 PM »
A couple of days ago, the senate select committee on intelligence voted to approve the Cyber Information Sharing Act - sponsored by Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca.) and Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.). 

"Under the terms of the new legislation, the government would be allowed to collect people's data from firms not just for cyber threats to infrastructure, but also for terms of service violations, the prosecution of identity theft, aiding prosecutions under the Espionage Act, or even to find the identity of whistleblowers."  It states that data that companies hand over should be stripped of personally identifiable information, but this only applies if the company has evidence that the user is a US citizen and if the information isn't directly related to a "cybersecurity threat."  How can this be known?  This basically is saying that anyone who violates any clause of a company's Terms of Service, such as Facebook's "You will not provide any false personal information on Facebook" clause, is capable of having their personal information wired to the federal government.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/07/08/privacy_groups_protest_senate_cybersecurity_sharing_law/

This may also affect net neutrality.  To quote what I read on another site:

"An ISP (e.g., Comcast) could argue that another service provider (e.g., Netflix) was "adversely impacting the availability" of information on its network, and thus it was going to take "any action" (e.g., throttling it down to nothing) to deal with the "threat." And, under the proposed legislation, there would be nothing anyone could do about it, as Comcast would be absolved from liability, as long as it could claim that all of that Netflix traffic was the equivalent to a cybersecurity threat according to its own definition. "(Source)

It is interesting how CNN, Fox News, and all the other 'mainstream media' are not covering this.  Fox seems obsessed with Obamacare, and CNN seems obsessed with that kid in the car story.

Sources:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/07/08/senate-intelligence-panel-advances-cybersecurity-bill/
http://www.defendingdissent.org/now/too-many-problems-with-cisa/
http://www.scmagazine.com/senate-intelligence-committee-approves-cyber-security-bill/article/360162/
https://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security-technology-and-liberty/beware-dangers-congress-latest-cybersecurity-bill