Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Considering many people only have the option of 1-2 providers...
They'll be taking full advantage.
Of course we have a right to the internet. The internet isn't owned by anyone. NN is about access and corporations trying to change it to pay-for-access.
When you're traveling down the freeway are certain exits blocked off or open depending on how much money the businesses off those exits paid for "access" to people traveling the freeway?
Hint: They're all open.
Somehow electricity providers were brought into this. Do suppliers get first whack at a customer based on if they pay more to the provider than another supplier or is the cost the same for all of them?
Hint: Cost is the same to all suppliers.
NN doesn't choke competition. It actually helps competition on the internet.
Anyone here can setup a website and have the same access to customers as Facebook, Google, etc.
No NN restricts that. You have to pay for access to customers.
Internet providers aside from real providers (like Google Fiber) have really no interest in investing more than they need to in order to provide the minimum service that keeps people quiet.
Yes! The country can use a lot more fiber.
No! The companies won't lay it unless they absolutely have to.
This is why we need more purely internet providers. Not these hacks that are phone companies or cable companies offering internet.
Which has nothing to do with NN.
I have to second the poster you're quoting. You're not understanding NN. See below...
^^ That is what NN is about.
Companies get caught regularly for things they're not supposed to do, pay a fine and don't have to admit guilt, and move on like nothing happened.
The jist of what he stated though, is exactly what NN is about.
A free market doesn't work with corporate America the size it is. That's why you have regulations or consumer protections built in.
Small business America is where the free market works.
and none of that is NN.
Again... NN is about ACCESS.
The regulations stifling new internet providers from popping up or municipalities setting up their own services is what needs to be torn down, not NN. Guess who spends millions upon millions to keep those regulations in place... The current internet providers.
Not true at all. A basic business or economics class can teach you that.
Who lobbies for those regulations? The telecom companies. They don't want you to take even the tinniest of slivers of their business.
Companies are against regulations when they are in their way, they're all for them when they keep the competition away.
LOL
They'll fight tooth and nail to keep those regulations in place.
A corporations has more rights than you do these days. They don't care about your "friendship."
The corporate world doesn't want government out. They can use it through lobbying regulations to keep their markets and squash competition before it starts.
You're assuming corporations behave in a manner that benefits society.
Yet, time and time again, they prove that without oversight they're fine burning the house down and giving you the bill as long as they make a bunch of money.
Governments roll in regulating business is to control an emotion humans have proven they cannot, greed.
I can recognize when my emotion of greed pops up and can do a really good job of suppressing it. I'm generally a really nice guy. However, if I was the CEO of one of these huge corporations and all of a sudden the government was no longer there to regulate or protect the consumer, then I fully recognize that I would do exactly what many of them do to the extent they're allowed.... squeeze the consumer for every penny I can get out of them while keeping costs as rock bottom as possible.
You cannot escape human nature. Anyone who says they'd do otherwise would never be a CEO.
Not going to happen. Corporations are too big and powerful. Many are transnationals now.
You're not going to make them smaller, they'll only get bigger, so you need a government with laws against/restricting lobbying by corporations.
Excellent Post
And it is true, they are to big now and to much money is involved where the only option is to revolt just like the days of old. The Big Corporations along with their lapdog politicians control everything and like a dog with a bone, they will never let go.
So a Tor browser and proxy server will no longer hide my address?
The Tor browser will continue to work the same as it was designed to work, regardless of who you have chosen for an Internet Provider. (it's a program, created by the navy, btw)
From my understanding if you are on a Tor browser and you come into a 'clear net' http rather than the onion extensions, you've given your location away as soon as you do it.
But your question is somewhat on the line of what I was thinking about earlier today and discussing with my son ... If we can't afford the ISP, can we not hook up to a Tor relay? He said, no ... doesn't work that way. Still need an ISP, to get to a relay ...
I just found two links interested in reading though ...
“If we lose net neutrality, the Internet will never be the same,” said Evan Greer, campaign director of Fight for the Future, one of the leading groups behind the protest. “No one wants their cable company to have control over what they can see and do online. Internet users know that their freedom is worth fighting for, and on July 12, we’ll fight to win.”
This is completely wrong. I worked in this field and know exactly the opposite is true. The government regulations prevent new competition and protect the existing companies’ monopoly.
At one time I was looking into starting a business to provide low cost long distance calls. The amount of regulations I must face is not something I could ever handle. The technology was there and the market was there but the telecom companies have the government on their side.
I know all about those regulations. They were purchased and lobbied for by the telecom companies. Lawmakers should get rid of them. But we're not talking about those regulations. We're talking about Net Neutrality.
Hmm, I never caught that. I thought she was someone who writes resumes for poor kids in Appalachia?
Not so sure, this is what they previously said. I didn't catch that they were a she.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer
This is completely wrong. I worked in this field and know exactly the opposite is true. The government regulations prevent new competition and protect the existing companies’ monopoly.
At one time I was looking into starting a business to provide low cost long distance calls. The amount of regulations I must face is not something I could ever handle. The technology was there and the market was there but the telecom companies have the government on their side.
I assume they meant telecommunications as the industry due to the use of the phrase "this field."
Internet should be treated as a utility. People can do without Cable/satellite (i have for 15 years) and a landline phone. Internet is necessary for banking, paying bills, searching and applying for most jobs, working from home and many other things.
As far as I know, Portugal offers dirt cheap plans for access to only Facebook and other social networks while offering unrestricted Internet access for a normal price. I don't think that's too bad, and I doubt Internet providers can get away with charging $300/mo for unrestricted access without conspiring with other providers to do so. But if they can do that, then they certainly can do it without even repealing Net Neutrality cause it has little to do with collusion.
ma bell...like many monopolies (think of the Rockefeller monopolies) was broke up by the GOVERNMENT
the problem is its all circular....remember when the broke up ma-bell (Bell telephone(AT+t)) into baby bells....3/4 of those baby bells have merged back together
baby bells: ameritech....now part of AT+T
................southwest bell...now back with att
.................bell south...now back with att
...............pacific tele...now back with att
of the 6 baby bells 4 are merged back together in att..the other two bell atlantic and nynex are now verizion
even way back when...land line were not all ma-bell.... sprint(worst company out there) was also a land line company
the government controls who will be a monopoly and who wont.......
they government needs to decide, do they allow monopolies or not....not the selective decision making the government is currently doing
Internet bandwidth is, at least currently, a finite resource and has to be allocated somehow. We can let politicians decide, or we can let you and me decide by leaving it up to the free market. If we choose politicians, we will see the Internet become another mismanaged public monopoly, subject to political whims and increased scrutiny from our friends at the NSA. If we leave it up to the free market we will, in time, receive more of what we want at a lower price. It may not be a perfect process, but it will be better than the alternative.
The push for net neutrality doesn’t seem to make much sense. We’re not talking about throttling rival services, or reducing broadband speeds for customers—just enabling the broadband provider to share the burden for network upgrades with the service that benefits and profits from those upgrades.
In most industries, giving customers exactly what they want is the easiest way to make a good profit, provided that it's not too difficult and expensive to make what the customers want. This is basically common sense, and it isn't different for the Broadband industry.
Repealing net neutrality still opens its own can of worms though.. if all major internet providers all conspire to block a certain popular website, all traffic from certain countries, etc. the Internet as we know today will no longer exist. In that case, we would need to look to how people (particularly hackers) living in countries with heavy Internet censorship like Iran and China have managed to get unrestricted Internet access over the years and copy their tactics.
And you dont think we are censored now on the internet? I hope you are kidding, the US censors internet more than people think.
error 404, page not found is sometimes evidence of censoring from what Ive seen, but it appears like it only applies to certain issues, topics.
The google of today is nothing like the google of 2005. It does a lot of it's own self censoring based on search results. The web of 2000-2005 was really more of a "dark web" compared to today.
The Republicons are at it again. Now they want to dictate your access to information and chip away at your right to free speech. The first step of dictators is to gain control of what you say and hear.
Please send an email to your Congressional delegation requesting them to save Net Neutrality. Including the members of the FCC would be a good idea, here's their addresses:
There’s about 50 pages on this in two recent threads.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Internet Neutrality
