February 27, 201511 yr Bottom line: If the government gets it's foot in the door they will do as they please.. No hyperbole. History has proved this several times. Agreed also (and I can't get the links to load up on my work PC so I am uninformed about this topic) if the government gets control of the internet, it won't be long before access is taxed. There are huge and growing e-commerce activities taking place on the internet that I am sure the government would like to control and make money from.
February 27, 201511 yr Another blaring huge issue why people should re-evaluate voting for democrats. While R's are not perfect , they are far from it , voting for dems at the national level is screwing up our country . Immigration , health care , the internet , and the IRS just to name 4 topics . Voting the other way wont create any utopia but much more of this and no one will trust any govt official or dept .
February 27, 201511 yr The status quo wasn't optimal either as you have massive telecom giants running what amounted to protection rackets on these other companies. Not even taking into account their exclusive contracts with cities and their constant attempts to stifle competition which keeps our speeds slower and far behind the rest of the world. I would much rather have seen some relaxing of regulations on startup broadband providers to stimulate innovation and fiber networks. The current system and speeds we have in the U.S. are a joke compared to the rest of the developed world. No competition has completely stagnated growth in this industry. Would you (or anyone) give us some statistics on this? @PepRock01
February 27, 201511 yr No. "Going forward, the FCC's net neutrality rules would cover consumers however they access the Web: PC, phone, tablet, etc. and all Internet service providers (cable, satellite, wireless) would have to adhere to three basic rules: no blocking, no throttling specific apps or content, and no paid prioritization." That has nothing to do with general bandwidth provisions. It's simply saying that ISPs cannot block or slow down (throttle back) traffic from certain content providers. like Netflicks, unless the provider pays the ISP for access to their network. The ruling also means that Vontage or Magic Jack cannot be blocked in favor of the ISP's own IP phone system. ISPs have always and will continue to offer faster bandwidth packages that cost more than the minimum bandwidth mandated by the FCC. This! Some are just confused, but others refuse to see these points.
February 27, 201511 yr I wonder if the massive public pressure actually had an impact. Shutting down the FCC website with comments had to get their attention. I think so. As I've already said in this thread: the telecoms only have themselves to blame for this. They lobbied the FCC to propose the rules last summer that sent everyone into a frenzy. Now the internet is being regulated as a utility which almost no one was talking about this time last year. They saw a chance to do something that could make them even more wealthy and powerful than before... they took it... and now this somewhat startling overreaction is the consequence.
March 1, 201511 yr Get ready for your internet tax. Have you looked at your bill? You're already paying taxes on your Internet.
March 1, 201511 yr And before anyone goes on to characterize me as an Obama fan, fan of government intervention, or a fan of excessive regulations I would suggest looking at my posting history.
March 12, 201511 yr Author Here Are the new rule. Have not read. http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0312/FCC-15-24A1.pdf
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.