Goodbye Net Neutrality

[guido]

It's the .001%'s world we just live in it...

F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules - The New York Times

[Matthew Strongin]

Well, it was great while it lasted.

[Scott G.]

Now Spectrum can charge extra for cat videos, hooray!
Who is willing to pay more for speed, the Cat Video Cartel or NetFlix ?

[dogrange]

This is good for consumers, right? Like my internet access bills are going to go down, yes? And I'll have better access to all this stuff I want to do on the internet, right?

[rec head]

This is good for consumers, right? Like my internet access bills are going to go down, yes? And I'll have better access to all this stuff I want to do on the internet, right?

and more choices of providers.


On a side note I have been noticing a downward trend in my connections speed test. Today it was back up there. Obviously net neutrality was the culprit.

[j44ke]

I am sure Ajit Pai is getting a nice pat on the head and a warm glass of milk from his handlers right now. One more thing that no one wanted but the government was determined to give everyone. The capitalist-speak associated with all of this is soul destroying mind f*ck.

[dgaddis]

So here's my question. What is the argument for repealing the rules?

Comcast posted this on their site: http://corporate.comcast.com/comcast...and-innovation

An excerpt:

Light touch regulation allows for more competition in the marketplace and increased investment and innovation. There’s no question that an open Internet is important. There is also no doubt that investment is essential to fostering technological growth. Since its creation, the Internet has opened the door for tremendous digital advances and innovations. It has changed how we communicate and how we interact on a day to day basis. The politically guided and motivated decision by the Wheeler FCC in 2015 to revert to Title II regulation slowed the pace of advancement and limited choices in the marketplace. For example, it was that misguided thinking that stunted the rollout of Comcast’s Stream TV, an in-home, IP-based cable service, which was stalled from a broad consumer rollout because of an unnecessary protracted FCC investigation.

The FCC’s order means what its title promises: restoring Internet freedom. Consumers deserve choice and a thriving, innovative competitive marketplace under light touch regulation. The contemplated ruling removes the overhang created by Title II and rightfully reclassifies broadband Internet access as an interstate information service. Additionally, the order returns authority to the FTC to regulate data privacy and security for the entire Internet ecosystem under a uniform federal technology-neutral framework. It also requires all Internet providers to disclose their net neutrality practices, and will hold ISPs accountable to these practices. The inter-agency agreement announced yesterday between the FCC and the FTC should put to rest the fear that there is any confusion about the relative enforcement jurisdictions of the two agencies in the net neutrality context.

That first paragraph might as well be latin to me. I don't know enough about how this stuff works to know whether or not that statement is BS - I don't know how the rules can limit investment or innovation. I imagine the net neutrality rules that were just overturned include a lot more than just 'net neutrality'.

The 2nd paragraph, if I'm reading it correctly, means the burden of policing these telecom companies is going back to the Federal Trade Commission...which, I don't know if that's a good or bad thing? Who polices it now, the FCC?

[djg714]

Competition?
That's always the answer they give you.
Funny.

[mzilliox]

dont worry, its gonna trickle down or something. Ill be honest, I dont know enough about the topic to be outraged. but i know i dont trust any of the authorities any more. Will my internet be fastr or slower now? will i even notice?

I guess only time will tell if anything really changes.

[dogrange]

So here's my question. What is the argument for repealing the rules?

Comcast posted this on their site: Reconfirming Comcast's Commitment to an Open Internet and Net Neutrality

An excerpt:



That first paragraph might as well be latin to me.

That's because it is complete bulls*** - their non-attempt to clarify (=attempt to confuse) the "argument" here is working.

[j44ke]

As I understand/stood it, the FCC was policing the Internet, because the government decided that the Internet was a utility like a phone company. Now the government says the Internet is a market, not a utility, so the FTC gets to regulate it.

Investment will be up because profits will be up, because without regulation, we will be able to charge 3x as much for 3x less and if you want the same, you'll have to pay a lot of money and you won't have any guarantees that you'll actually get that connection speed because hey, no regulation! With regulation, the government could hold ISP's to promises on speed of connection and also require more revenue was spent on development of faster better and more widely available internet.

This is mostly going to hurt anyone who has an Internet-only business model, anyone who lives in the country and does not have broadband now, and anyone who has a brain.

[ericpmoss]

Ajit Pai is from Verizon, and will be rewarded handsomely for this when he returns to industry. The point of net neutrality is that the net itself -- the fabric of servers and links -- is a level playing field, with no preferential treatment for Comcast movies over Netflix movies over Greenpeace videos on YouTube. Now, if I want faster internet, I can pay for better service, and then when I choose to watch Greenpeace, the service is everything I expected -- not dependent on me paying extra because it's not a Comcast product.

But, let the creators of the internet say it, as they are, well, the creators of the internet: Internet pioneers call for FCC to cancel net neutrality vote. There is a link to their letter in the article.

[j44ke]

By "we" above I mean ISP's. Personality disorder ftw.

But a lot of the changes are going to happen at the backbone level, right? Up until now all the interconnection agreements between services that owned portions of the Internet's pinch points kept things reasonably equitable. Now anyone who owns a piece of the backbone may be able to prioritize traffic, so that it won't just be your kitty video that will be slow to download, it could be entire regions, states, countries, etc.

I don't know all the right terms to talk about this, and I may have this wrong. But "Internet exchange points and network access points" - stealing terms from an article - may become like tool booths essentially, if they aren't already. At least that's my impression.

edit: I need a nap. Too many errors.

[dgaddis]

As I understand/stood it, the FCC was policing the Internet, because the government decided that the Internet was a utility like a phone company. Now the government says the Internet is a market, not a utility, so the FTC gets to regulate it.

I would agree that the internet is more like a market than a utility. I can't choose who provides my electricity or water. But I can choose who I buy internet from, though I know that's not always the case depending on where you live. Even phones I can choose who I buy service from, especially if talking cell phones.

I don't like the idea that these companies could have 'fast lanes' and block access to certain sites unless you buy a more expensive package. But beyond that, I don't know anything else about the rules that were repealed.

[Matthew Strongin]

I would agree that the internet is more like a market than a utility. I can't choose who provides my electricity or water. But I can choose who I buy internet from, though I know that's not always the case depending on where you live. Even phones I can choose who I buy service from, especially if talking cell phones.

I don't like the idea that these companies could have 'fast lanes' and block access to certain sites unless you buy a more expensive package. But beyond that, I don't know anything else about the rules that were repealed.

Even in very densely populated areas like Miami there are only a couple options for reasonable internet. It's not an open market like groceries, where I can choose which of the 8 different chains I want to visit, where each carries a similar selection and I'm choosing based on price or preference. I get to choose between AT&T or Comcast or go with the one other option, a rinky dink satellite company with bandwidth speeds lower than the LTE on my cellphone. So it's just AT&T or Comcast. And in a post-net neutrality world, if one of those companies decides to throttle or block content that is provided by the other (and keep in mind these are mega corps that own content producing sub-mega businesses), or charge a premium, to steer you towards their content, they can now do that. When dealing with entertainment content, it's annoying. When dealing with news and access to information, it's dangerous. And that's just one example.

When you think about how much of our lives, infrastructure, business, etc. is dependent on the internet for proper function, it's hard not to see it as a utility. If these internet service providers are unable to figure out how to make a buck or invest in innovation in a utility model, they should look to other utilities like power. Power companies, for the most part, have figured out how to run profitable and innovative businesses.

Also, in the spirit of "innovation" that repealing net neutrality will spur, it favors allowing mega ISPs to change their models for even higher profitability, while making it more difficult for small businesses to get fair shake. For example, my wife runs a mom and pop retail business. Her biggest local competitor is owned by a national chain. It's not a stretch to imagine that mega competitor can use national leverage and buying power for preferential treatment, which will make it harder for people to find my wife's mom and pop. This stuff matters to small and fledgling businesses.

[sine]

Well, it was great while it lasted.

For all of 2 years.........give or take..............never noticed any changes.

[guido]

For all of 2 years.........give or take..............never noticed any changes.

Confirmation it was working just fine. Better than that since it provided too much power and freedom to actual users. Can't have that says Comcast, Verizon et al...

[rec head]

To try and simplify: Net Neutrality refers to all bits being equal. Sure you may have to pay for more bandwidth or larger data caps but where (who) the bits come from shouldn't matter.

Internet providers can now charge based on whatever they want. Comcast can charge you more to stream Youtube than it's own services.

My guess why the big content providers like Google, Facebook and Netflix didn't outright buy off the FCC board (because obviously someone did) is that they are looking to 5G. I won't be surprised when that is introduced if they haven't built a huge amount of infrastructure. Not only is there profit to be made charging you for service but also lots of that mysterious metadata.

[King Of Dirk]

To try and simplify: Net Neutrality refers to all bits being equal. Sure you may have to pay for more bandwidth or larger data caps but where (who) the bits come from shouldn't matter.

Internet providers can now charge based on whatever they want. Comcast can charge you more to stream Youtube than it's own services.

My guess why the big content providers like Google, Facebook and Netflix didn't outright buy off the FCC board (because obviously someone did) is that they are looking to 5G. I won't be surprised when that is introduced if they haven't built a huge amount of infrastructure. Not only is there profit to be made charging you for service but also lots of that mysterious metadata.

As a person who is woefully undereducated on the issue, I appreciate this explanation.

[Matthew Strongin]

For all of 2 years.........give or take..............never noticed any changes.

Well, I was actually making a joke about the end of the internet as we know it, but since you mentioned...

Net Neutrality was about 15 years in the making and came about after a series of relatively high profile (at least in the nerd circles where I hang) cases where consumers and customers sought protection from the overreach of ISPs. Examples include Comcast blocking, or "delaying" as they explained, BitTorrent traffic or ATT throttling FaceTime to push iPhone users to a different, more expensive plan. Verizon was also contemplating charging websites for delivery across their network; so users would pay for service and websites would have to pay to be delivered, which would be absolutely impossible for the vast majority of websites, which aren't in a position to pay for this (VSalon would likely fall into this category of sites that may not be able to pay ISP fees to ensure delivery). Verizon didn't, not out of goodwill, but because of the FCC's publishing of the Open Internet Order (posted below for reference). When companies like Comcast talk about repealing Net Neutrality as the basis for new innovation, what they're really saying is that they can now make money extorting content producers and consumers so they'll have more to spend on their own projects to make them more money. Innovations like the next great social media platform will likely stall because the $350 billion dollar Facebook/Instagram machine can afford to pay for service in the fast lane. The next big thing, which likely hasn't been invented yet, probably won't be able to pay to compete.

Net Neutrality isn't/wasn't a new set of rules put in place 2 years ago that didn't change anything from the previous situation. It is/was the codification of many years of legal battles and public debate. As the internet has evolved, mega-corp ISPs have continually tried to do exactly what they will now be allowed to do in a post net neutrality world. There just won't be regulations preventing them from doing so anymore. Here's a website that lays out how Net Neutrality unfolded: A Timeline of Net Neutrality

If you haven't watched it, the John Oliver/Tom Wheeler videos are pretty funny...especially where Tom Wheeler feels the need to explain that he's not a dingo.