Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [EFF] FCC Announces Plan to Abandon Net Neutrality and ISP Privacy
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[EFF] FCC Announces Plan to Abandon Net Neutrality and ISP Privacy - Page 12

post #111 of 164
This is what blind faith in Friedman economics gets you, more monopolies and unaccountable corporations.
post #112 of 164
Yay smile.gif About time. I was worried this would never move in the right direction.
post #113 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diffident View Post

Something like this will never happen. This isn't the same as cable tv packages. Cables companies pay for the right to broadcast each channel. ISP's don't pay for the right to carry a particular web site. To charge money to access a particular web site would be a violation of trademark and copyright law, the same way it is illegal to charge admission to watch the Super Bowl or for retailers to have "Super Bowl" Sales without paying for a license agreement.

Most ISP's are monoplies which puts them under antitrust laws that already exist, and these laws are what should be used to prevent these things from happening.

When Net Neutrality dies and when some data can be given preferential treatment over others, who is to stop these monopolies from crippling Youtube and Netflix speeds to ensure they keep making money off their own TV packages?

What is to stop these companies from crippling speeds to sites that criticize their company or to sites that are fighting back against the end of NN?

What's stopping these companies from crippling their competitors websites?

What's stopping these companies from crippling political sites that do align with their own politics?

When NN dies, the first and worst thing to die is free speech and we all know that. Tiered internet packages and higher priced internet is just a secondary concern, but I thought I would bring the tiered package issue because it would resonate more with the average person.
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
[Intel Core i7] [*T] [Intel iGPU] [*] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
[*] [Windows 7 Professional 64-bit] [Samsung SyncMaster P2770FH 27" 1080P] [Logitech MK320 cordless] 
PowerCaseMouse
[Corsair AX1200] [Corsair Obsidian 800D] [Logitech MK300 cordless] 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
[Intel Core i7] [*T] [Intel iGPU] [*] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
[*] [Windows 7 Professional 64-bit] [Samsung SyncMaster P2770FH 27" 1080P] [Logitech MK320 cordless] 
PowerCaseMouse
[Corsair AX1200] [Corsair Obsidian 800D] [Logitech MK300 cordless] 
  hide details  
Reply
post #114 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by i7monkey View Post

When Net Neutrality dies and when some data can be given preferential treatment over others, who is to stop these monopolies from crippling Youtube and Netflix speeds to ensure they keep making money off their own TV packages?

What is to stop these companies from crippling speeds to sites that criticize their company or to sites that are fighting back against the end of NN?

What's stopping these companies from crippling their competitors websites?

What's stopping these companies from crippling political sites that do align with their own politics?


When properly enforced, Antitrust law. Comcast, which owns NBC is not allowed to deny NBC stations from being carried by competing companies in order to boost it's own subscribers. To try to cripple Youtube or Netflix or any other competing website for the same purpose would cost them billions in Antitrust fines. The tactic most likely to be used is data caps, which was not covered under net neutrality anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by i7monkey View Post

Tiered internet packages and higher priced internet is just a secondary concern, but I thought I would bring the tiered package issue because it would resonate more with the average person.

So in other words, your spreading a lie in order to gain supporters.
Boinc Desktop
(14 items)
 
CrunchAholic
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K ASUS x99A/3.1USB Gigabyte G1 GTX 970 HyperX Predator 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Hyper Predator M.2 EK Supremecy EVO CPU Block EK G1 GTX 970 Block EK-Coolstream PE 360 Radiator  
CoolingCoolingOSPower
EK-Coolstream XE 240 Radiator EK Vardar F4-120ER Fans  Funtoo Linux EVGA 850 G2 
CaseMouse
Fractal Design Define S Logitech G400s 
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Intel Xeon E5-2670 Intel Xeon E5-2670 Asrock Rack EP2C602 XFX RX 480 RS 
RAMHard DriveOSPower
64 GBs Samsung M939B1K70CHD-CH9 PC3-10600R Samsung HD322HJ Arch Linux Corsair AX1200 
  hide details  
Reply
Boinc Desktop
(14 items)
 
CrunchAholic
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K ASUS x99A/3.1USB Gigabyte G1 GTX 970 HyperX Predator 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Hyper Predator M.2 EK Supremecy EVO CPU Block EK G1 GTX 970 Block EK-Coolstream PE 360 Radiator  
CoolingCoolingOSPower
EK-Coolstream XE 240 Radiator EK Vardar F4-120ER Fans  Funtoo Linux EVGA 850 G2 
CaseMouse
Fractal Design Define S Logitech G400s 
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Intel Xeon E5-2670 Intel Xeon E5-2670 Asrock Rack EP2C602 XFX RX 480 RS 
RAMHard DriveOSPower
64 GBs Samsung M939B1K70CHD-CH9 PC3-10600R Samsung HD322HJ Arch Linux Corsair AX1200 
  hide details  
Reply
post #115 of 164
Uhhhh much of the reasoning behind shifting regulatory authority from the DOJ/FTC to the FCC was actually exactly because antitrust law is/was not effectively enforceable by either agency, as demonstrated by their lack of ability to regulate those markets while under their authority and the lack of antitrust law suitably applicable to ISPs...

You're entire argument is based on counterfactuals, making it as probable as i7monkey's argument...

Pointing to antitrust law is a (politically motivated) red herring to repeal the Open Internet Order's regulatory standards by arguing that that regulatory authority already exists. They are two different things, and ideally the DOJ/FTC would work with the FCC/whatever regulatory authority to ensure market fairness (this is how most mergers are managed in many markets since the DOJ/FTC can't be an authority on everything).
Edited by claes - 4/29/17 at 1:58pm
finally quiet
(20 items)
 
Peggy
(11 items)
 
Betty - WIP
(17 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-760 3.8 + turbo MSI P55-GD80 MSI GTX 970 Golden Edition 16GB Tactical LP 1600 c8 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 128GB OCZ Agility 60GB Spinpoint F3 1TB Noctua NH-U12P SE2 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
2x NF-P12, CPU OS X 10.10, 8.1 Ultimate Asus VW246H Ergotron Neo-Flex 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
CM Quick Fire Rapid EVGA Supernova G2 850W Silverstone FT-02W CM Spawn 
AudioAudioAudio
Sony TA-AX380 Sennheiser HD 280 KLH 911B 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i3-2125 GA-H61N USB3 HD3000 8GB Samsung Miracle RAM 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Kingston 60GB 3ware/LSI 9750-4i Hitachi 5k3000 2TB x4 RAID 5 Intel for now 
OSPowerCase
OS X 10.8.2 Corsiar CX430M Fractal Design Node 304 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i3-2100 ASUS P8H67-M PRO/CSM ASUS Passive GT 440 4GB Dominator 1600 c8 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingCooling
Hitachi 120GB 2.5" LG BR-RW CM GeminII S + NF-P12 2x NF-R8 - Intake 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
NF-B9 Windows 7 Sony KDL-46NX700 MK700 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Antec EA-650 Zalman HD160XT, Modded MK700 Yamaha RX-V373 
  hide details  
Reply
finally quiet
(20 items)
 
Peggy
(11 items)
 
Betty - WIP
(17 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-760 3.8 + turbo MSI P55-GD80 MSI GTX 970 Golden Edition 16GB Tactical LP 1600 c8 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 128GB OCZ Agility 60GB Spinpoint F3 1TB Noctua NH-U12P SE2 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
2x NF-P12, CPU OS X 10.10, 8.1 Ultimate Asus VW246H Ergotron Neo-Flex 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
CM Quick Fire Rapid EVGA Supernova G2 850W Silverstone FT-02W CM Spawn 
AudioAudioAudio
Sony TA-AX380 Sennheiser HD 280 KLH 911B 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i3-2125 GA-H61N USB3 HD3000 8GB Samsung Miracle RAM 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Kingston 60GB 3ware/LSI 9750-4i Hitachi 5k3000 2TB x4 RAID 5 Intel for now 
OSPowerCase
OS X 10.8.2 Corsiar CX430M Fractal Design Node 304 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i3-2100 ASUS P8H67-M PRO/CSM ASUS Passive GT 440 4GB Dominator 1600 c8 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingCooling
Hitachi 120GB 2.5" LG BR-RW CM GeminII S + NF-P12 2x NF-R8 - Intake 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
NF-B9 Windows 7 Sony KDL-46NX700 MK700 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Antec EA-650 Zalman HD160XT, Modded MK700 Yamaha RX-V373 
  hide details  
Reply
post #116 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diffident View Post

Cables companies pay for the right to broadcast each channel. ISP's don't pay for the right to carry a particular web site.
They could. If a web site can charge people to access it it can charge ISPs to access it. Corporations are people, remember? rolleyes.gif

What's more likely, though, is for the data to be encrypted until the consumer chooses to pay for the service or not — like the scrambling of the Spice channel and HBO. This way, ISPs can claim they are providing full Internet support but people will still be charged for the decryption — a joint profit agreement between the web site operator and the ISP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diffident View Post

To charge money to access a particular web site would be a violation of trademark and copyright law
How? Web site owners could very easily modify their walled garden model to cut deals with ISPs.
post #117 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by claes View Post

Uhhhh much of the reasoning behind shifting regulatory authority from the DOJ/FTC to the FCC was actually exactly because antitrust law is/was not effectively enforceable by either agency, as demonstrated by their lack of ability to regulate those markets while under their authority and the lack of antitrust law suitably applicable to ISPs...

You're entire argument is based on counterfactuals, making it as probable as i7monkey's argument...

Pointing to antitrust law is a (politically motivated) red herring to repeal the Open Internet Order's regulatory standards by arguing that that regulatory authority already exists. They are two different things, and ideally the DOJ/FTC would work with the FCC/whatever regulatory authority to ensure market fairness (this is how most mergers are managed in many markets since the DOJ/FTC can't be an authority on everything).

I'm not against net neutrally. I'm just pointing out that it isn't the end of the world and that these doomsday scenarios are unlikely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by superstition222 View Post

They could. If a web site can charge people to access it it can charge ISPs to access it. Corporations are people, remember? rolleyes.gif

What's more likely, though, is for the data to be encrypted until the consumer chooses to pay for the service or not — like the scrambling of the Spice channel and HBO. This way, ISPs can claim they are providing full Internet support but people will still be charged for the decryption — a joint profit agreement between the web site operator and the ISP.
How? Web site owners could very easily modify their walled garden model to cut deals with ISPs.

If a web site would charge an ISP for it to be accessed from the ISP's customers, net neutrality wouldn't apply since the web site itself is limiting access not the ISP.
Boinc Desktop
(14 items)
 
CrunchAholic
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K ASUS x99A/3.1USB Gigabyte G1 GTX 970 HyperX Predator 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Hyper Predator M.2 EK Supremecy EVO CPU Block EK G1 GTX 970 Block EK-Coolstream PE 360 Radiator  
CoolingCoolingOSPower
EK-Coolstream XE 240 Radiator EK Vardar F4-120ER Fans  Funtoo Linux EVGA 850 G2 
CaseMouse
Fractal Design Define S Logitech G400s 
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Intel Xeon E5-2670 Intel Xeon E5-2670 Asrock Rack EP2C602 XFX RX 480 RS 
RAMHard DriveOSPower
64 GBs Samsung M939B1K70CHD-CH9 PC3-10600R Samsung HD322HJ Arch Linux Corsair AX1200 
  hide details  
Reply
Boinc Desktop
(14 items)
 
CrunchAholic
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K ASUS x99A/3.1USB Gigabyte G1 GTX 970 HyperX Predator 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Hyper Predator M.2 EK Supremecy EVO CPU Block EK G1 GTX 970 Block EK-Coolstream PE 360 Radiator  
CoolingCoolingOSPower
EK-Coolstream XE 240 Radiator EK Vardar F4-120ER Fans  Funtoo Linux EVGA 850 G2 
CaseMouse
Fractal Design Define S Logitech G400s 
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Intel Xeon E5-2670 Intel Xeon E5-2670 Asrock Rack EP2C602 XFX RX 480 RS 
RAMHard DriveOSPower
64 GBs Samsung M939B1K70CHD-CH9 PC3-10600R Samsung HD322HJ Arch Linux Corsair AX1200 
  hide details  
Reply
post #118 of 164
There are a lot of ways to try to use incrementalism to get to/toward the cable model over time.


1) Microtransactions. (Mimicking current video game marketing, especially MMOs.). Want HD Youtube for a week? Pay a small fee. Your ISP will helpfully enable you to pay more per month to bypass those manual transactions.

2) Hybrid walled garden approach. Pay for some "premium" content, other content is free. (Mimicking F2P MMO marketing.) Again, you can choose to have your ISP helpfully manage those transactions and even get a discount by signing up for an on-going fee!

3) Ad-free browsing offered for a fee/deal. (As browsers become more homogenized around WebKit and newer AV-delivery frameworks, it could be possible to kill ad blocking on Windows and Mac. Also, ISPs could have a specific policy that ad blockers aren't permitted.)

4) EULA could state that you will keep your ISP for a period of time in order to retain access to specific sites. (Mimicking ISP early cancellation fees — imprisonment perks.)

5) Classic walled garden approach, modified per ISP plan. This is unlikely to fly because many people don't have choice in terms of which ISP to get. However, if all major ISPs get on board then that helps their effort to squash small ISPs – something that could make the few large ISPs cooperate with each other to agree to a "sensible" policy for popular sites like Facebook. Meanwhile, small ISPs would have to cut deals with big/powerful content providers at a disadvantage.

6) Subscribing to a website package could increase your data cap. Yay, more gigabytes!

7) Subscribing to a website package could get ISPs to enable protocols like torrent and nntp. Many ISPs have dumped the news protocol, causing people to have to pay extra for Giganews. So, people are already paying extra for access to some parts of the Internet. Some public universities, for instance, have blocked torrents and other file-sharing protocols for many years.

8) Pitching incremental packaging of Internet content as being family-friendly/kid safe. At first, such packaging could be sold as a parental filtration mechanism for schools, libraries, and concerned parents. Never doubt the marketing power of "protecting kids" and safeguarding "the family".

9) A newer flashier search engine could be introduced. (Mimicking the way Chrome marketing swamped other browsers' marketshare.) People are always on the lookout for new shiny. Google search is old hat. Google could cooperate with another company to make a subsidiary brand or just set up its own subsidiary, marketing a premium search engine as newer, better, better-than-Google. We know Google won't hand over search dominance so such an endeavor would have to be either managed by Google or set up in a cooperative manner with Microsoft so that neither company feels their bottom line will be threatened. In any case, remember AltaVista and lots of other once-popular search engines? Even more simply, both Google and Microsoft could separately introduce Google Premium and Bing Platinum.

10) Fake/watered-down/cheesy privacy features could be added to premium services, like useless VPNs that are as fast as the regular Internet.

11) Bringing cable to the Internet subscription model, e.g. ESPN. Never underestimate the power of football. Merging the content of cable and the Internet...

12) Stealth throttling, something Comcast and others have already been doing at times. The Internet has plenty of bandwidth available but it's very possible to funnel data through congested servers to create problems. (Mimicking the New Jersey traffic incident.) Set up subsidiary brands and then, through word-of-mouth, people will switch to the more expensive one that has better performance.
Edited by superstition222 - 4/29/17 at 2:52pm
post #119 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diffident View Post

If a web site would charge an ISP for it to be accessed from the ISP's customers, net neutrality wouldn't apply since the web site itself is limiting access not the ISP.
Not necessarily. From a consumer perspective that could easily involve collusion between the ISP and the website. The basic argument is that the ISP isn't providing the consumer with the full Internet. However, scrambling might be a loophole, as long as the ISP can prove, to the satisfaction of the courts, that it didn't collude.
post #120 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by superstition222 View Post

There are a lot of ways to try to use incrementalism to get to/toward the cable model over time.


1) Microtransactions. (Mimicking current video game marketing, especially MMOs.). Want HD Youtube for a week? Pay a small fee. Your ISP will helpfully enable you to pay more per month to bypass those manual transactions.

2) Hybrid walled garden approach. Pay for some "premium" content, other content is free. (Mimicking F2P MMO marketing.) Again, you can choose to have your ISP helpfully manage those transactions and even get a discount by signing up for an on-going fee!

3) Ad-free browsing offered for a fee/deal. (As browsers become more homogenized around WebKit and newer AV-delivery frameworks, it could be possible to kill ad blocking on Windows and Mac. Also, ISPs could have a specific policy that ad blockers aren't permitted.)

4) EULA could state that you will keep your ISP for a period of time in order to retain access to specific sites. (Mimicking ISP early cancellation fees — imprisonment perks.)

5) Classic walled garden approach, modified per ISP plan. This is unlikely to fly because many people don't have choice in terms of which ISP to get. However, if all major ISPs get on board then that helps their effort to squash small ISPs – something that could make the few large ISPs cooperate with each other to agree to a "sensible" policy for popular sites like Facebook. Meanwhile, small ISPs would have to cut deals with big/powerful content providers at a disadvantage.

6) Subscribing to a website package could increase your data cap. Yay, more gigabytes!

7) Subscribing to a website package could get ISPs to enable protocols like torrent and nntp. Many ISPs have dumped the news protocol, causing people to have to pay extra for Giganews. So, people are already paying extra for access to some parts of the Internet. Some public universities, for instance, have blocked torrents and other file-sharing protocols for many years.

8) Pitching incremental packaging of Internet content as being family-friendly/kid safe. At first, such packaging could be sold as a parental filtration mechanism for schools, libraries, and concerned parents. Never doubt the marketing power of "protecting kids" and safeguarding "the family".

9) A newer flashier search engine could be introduced. (Mimicking the way Chrome marketing swamped other browsers' marketshare.) People are always on the lookout for new shiny. Google search is old hat. Google could cooperate with another company to make a subsidiary brand or just set up its own subsidiary, marketing a premium search engine as newer, better, better-than-Google. We know Google won't hand over search dominance so such an endeavor would have to be either managed by Google or set up in a cooperative manner with Microsoft so that neither company feels their bottom line will be threatened. In any case, remember AltaVista and lots of other once-popular search engines? Even more simply, both Google and Microsoft could separately introduce Google Premium and Bing Platinum.

10) Fake/watered-down/cheesy privacy features could be added to premium services, like useless VPNs that are as fast as the regular Internet.

11) Bringing cable to the Internet subscription model, e.g. ESPN. Never underestimate the power of football. Merging the content of cable and the Internet...

12) Stealth throttling, something Comcast and others have already been doing at times. The Internet has plenty of bandwidth available but it's very possible to funnel data through congested servers to create problems. (Mimicking the New Jersey traffic incident.) Set up subsidiary brands and then, through word-of-mouth, people will switch to the more expensive one that has better performance.

I'm not going to go through all of these, sorry if they are out of order........

9) Search engines will never limit its customer base when they make all there money from advertising. The only reason why MS wants everyone on edge is because it defaults to bing.

7) ISP's don't block newsgroups, they just don't provide access to them through themselves. Some ISP's no longer have there own email either, but they aren't blocking it.

10) ATT was charging extra for privacy even with net neutrality.

As for the ads and browsers, that's were the beauty of open source comes in.


You need to stop coming up with these things...you're just giving people ideas. tongue.gif
Boinc Desktop
(14 items)
 
CrunchAholic
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K ASUS x99A/3.1USB Gigabyte G1 GTX 970 HyperX Predator 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Hyper Predator M.2 EK Supremecy EVO CPU Block EK G1 GTX 970 Block EK-Coolstream PE 360 Radiator  
CoolingCoolingOSPower
EK-Coolstream XE 240 Radiator EK Vardar F4-120ER Fans  Funtoo Linux EVGA 850 G2 
CaseMouse
Fractal Design Define S Logitech G400s 
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Intel Xeon E5-2670 Intel Xeon E5-2670 Asrock Rack EP2C602 XFX RX 480 RS 
RAMHard DriveOSPower
64 GBs Samsung M939B1K70CHD-CH9 PC3-10600R Samsung HD322HJ Arch Linux Corsair AX1200 
  hide details  
Reply
Boinc Desktop
(14 items)
 
CrunchAholic
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K ASUS x99A/3.1USB Gigabyte G1 GTX 970 HyperX Predator 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Hyper Predator M.2 EK Supremecy EVO CPU Block EK G1 GTX 970 Block EK-Coolstream PE 360 Radiator  
CoolingCoolingOSPower
EK-Coolstream XE 240 Radiator EK Vardar F4-120ER Fans  Funtoo Linux EVGA 850 G2 
CaseMouse
Fractal Design Define S Logitech G400s 
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Intel Xeon E5-2670 Intel Xeon E5-2670 Asrock Rack EP2C602 XFX RX 480 RS 
RAMHard DriveOSPower
64 GBs Samsung M939B1K70CHD-CH9 PC3-10600R Samsung HD322HJ Arch Linux Corsair AX1200 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Technology and Science News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [EFF] FCC Announces Plan to Abandon Net Neutrality and ISP Privacy