Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
FreeBaGeL

And on that day, Net Neutrality died

381 posts in this topic

Quote

Nine Republican US senators yesterday submitted legislation that would prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from ever again using the regulatory authority that allowed the commission to impose net neutrality rules. The "Restoring Internet Freedom Act" would prohibit the FCC from classifying ISPs as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act and "from imposing certain regulations on providers of such service."

The Internet "is threatened by the Federal Communications Commission’s 2015 Open Internet Order, which would put federal bureaucrats in charge of engineering the Internet’s infrastructure," Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah). said in an announcement yesterday. "That is why I am introducing the Restoring Internet Freedom Act, which would nullify [the] Open Internet Order and prohibit the FCC from issuing a similar rule in the future.”

Lee's bill was co-sponsored by Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), and James Inhofe (R-Ok.). In the announcement, Cruz repeated his charge that net neutrality is "Obamacare for the Internet."

The full bill text isn't available yet, but it appears to be identical to another one proposed last year. That bill would have prohibited the FCC from issuing a new net neutrality rule "unless the rule is specifically authorized by a law enacted after enactment of this Act." There was also an "Internet Freedom Act" to wipe out net neutrality rules in 2015.

The FCC attempted to impose net neutrality rules without using its Title II authority in 2010, but Verizon sued and the rules were struck down in court. The FCC finally was able to impose net neutrality rules that were upheld in court after reclassifying ISPs as common carriers. Among other things, the rules prohibit ISPs from blocking, throttling, or prioritizing Internet websites and applications in exchange for payment. The latest court decision upholding the current net neutrality rules was also issued yesterday.

Meanwhile, the FCC's new Republican chairman, Ajit Pai, has proposed overturning the Title II classification and net neutrality rules in his own "Restoring Internet Freedom" plan. Some Republicans in Congress support net neutrality legislation that would ban blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization of Internet traffic without using Title II. But from what we know about Lee's bill so far, it appears the proposal wouldn't impose any type of net neutrality rules to replace the current ones.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/05/gops-internet-freedom-act-permanently-guts-net-neutrality-authority/?comments=1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THE INTERNET WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS.  

 

REJUVENATE, NERDS

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Un#######believable what some of these ######bags will or won't do for a buck.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is where you need to start calling/emailing/writing/tweeting/facebooking etc your Senators and let those ######## know that you will not stand for this #### and that you will remember this come election time.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No surprise.  It's actually funny that the internet is what killed their fat pig that they sucked off for so long and now their only recourse is trying to control it.  Have fun lobbying for it because you're only going keep alienating customers while real companies step in and take over.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Chaka said:

This is where you need to start calling/emailing/writing/tweeting/facebooking etc your Senators and let those ######## know that you will not stand for this #### and that you will remember this come election time.

Tweet /email/ Facebook just to get other people mad enough to act.

 

Call. Call. Call. Call. Call. Call. Call. Then call again.  

Anything else is much less effective.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AhrnCityPahnder said:

Tweet /email/ Facebook just to get other people mad enough to act.

 

Call. Call. Call. Call. Call. Call. Call. Then call again.  

Anything else is much less effective.  

Totally agree. I just didn't want to get into the weeds on the whole Indivisible plan of action.

But, yes, calling and showing up on their doorsteps (with as many like minded people as possible) is definitely most effective.

Take two minutes and call every single day.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Binky The Doormat said:

I just got a big red block with a virus signal when I clicked on this link.

Thanks.

Really?  I will update it.

ETA: Done

Edited by Chaka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so we get the facts straight:

April 26th - New Republican FCC Chairman Ajit Pai puts forth a proposal to roll back FCC rules from 2015, basically claiming they don't need them because they haven't had many problems with the ISPs.

May 1st -  U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit up holds ruling from 2015 classifying ISPs of common carriers and subject to FCC regulation with regard to throttling and controlling content.  This opens the way to a Supreme Court appeal.

May 2nd - Nine Republicans, including Ted Cruz, co-sponsor legislation to re-write the current laws and prohibit the FCC from classifying ISPs as common carriers.  Which might avoid the need for a Supreme Court appeal.

 

Make no mistake, this is big business with deep pockets reaching in those pockets to influence government to change the rules because they've lost their monopoly on cable tv.  It might be an interesting next couple of years, but, in the end I'm not worried.  I have full faith companies like Google and Amazon can out maneuver antiquated companies like Comcast and Verizon.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) I'm an idiot.

2) Somebody break down what exactly the FCC rules are why they are needed.

TIA

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like someone to explain how any citizen, not affiliated with an ISP, would benefit from eliminating net neutrality.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was enjoying this statement: "unless the rule is specifically authorized by a law enacted after enactment of this Act."

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, rascal said:

1) I'm an idiot.

2) Somebody break down what exactly the FCC rules are why they are needed.

TIA

To keep ISPs company from throttling intent speeds and blocking content or access to content by their customers.  Keeps intent fair and open.  

Or in Comcast language; they want to be able to throttle speeds and charge people indiscriminately for access.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chaka said:

This is where you need to start calling/emailing/writing/tweeting/facebooking etc your Senators and let those ######## know that you will not stand for this #### and that you will remember this come election time.

It comes down to the people that have Republican senators though. Those people need to stand up and be heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest threat will be the "throttling" of Netflix, Amazon, and other sites where you want to watch movies and other large files.  Or, pay a #### load more money to have the access to not be "throttled!" 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chaka said:

This is where you need to start calling/emailing/writing/tweeting/facebooking etc your Senators and let those ######## know that you will not stand for this #### and that you will remember this come election time.

Big problem with the Wisconsin senator that co-signed this bill is that he just won reelection this past year. We have 6 years of this ####stick... 12 total. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, rascal said:

2) Somebody break down what exactly the FCC rules are why they are needed.

Without it, ISPs are free to make your internet bill look like this

13 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AhrnCityPahnder said:

Without it, ISPs are free to make your internet bill look like this

I love it. They should really do this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, AhrnCityPahnder said:

Without it, ISPs are free to make your internet bill look like this

I could like this a thousand more times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, SHIZNITTTT said:

The biggest threat will be the "throttling" of Netflix, Amazon, and other sites where you want to watch movies and other large files.  Or, pay a #### load more money to have the access to not be "throttled!" 

This is what its about, cable companies losing money to internet streaming sites.  Verizon charges Netflix to access their "fast" lane - Netflix raises your monthly fee.

Oh, and no more free pron.

Edited by Amused to Death
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Mario Kart said:

Big problem with the Wisconsin senator that co-signed this bill is that he just won reelection this past year. We have 6 years of this ####stick... 12 total. 

Well, voters in Wisconsin need to remember this #### for six years then.

Call, call, call, call and demand he withdraw sponsorship of this bill.

Then call again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, The Z Machine said:

It comes down to the people that have Republican senators though. Those people need to stand up and be heard.

We all need to let our Senators know, and Representatives if/when this hits the House that we will not stand for this #### and we want them to let their ######bag co-workers that there will be hell to pay if this doesn't die a quick death.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly can't believe anyone votes for these clowns

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Amused to Death said:

This is what its about, cable companies losing money to internet streaming sites.  Verizon charges Netflix to access their "fast" lane - Netflix raises your monthly fee.

Oh, and no more free pron.

Whoa whoa whoa what's this now?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think mostly everyone cares about this, but they don't have it as a high priority so they will keep supporting the same #######s that are going to kill the internet.  For example I'm sure all the nerds at 4chan will be fine with it because what's more important is perpetuating the nihilist freak republicans for the lulz, so they'll be fine with hurting themselves with this garbage.  Then you have all the leftover old people born pre-1940 who 95% of them have no idea what the internet does but their church says baby jesus would be a republican, so that's what they are.  And they vote at a higher rate than anyone.  The internet is gonna die.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have any of these buttholes attempted to float an argument on how this is good for consumers?  And just how hilarious was it?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Chaka said:

NseI would like someone to explain how any citizen, not affiliated with an ISP, would benefit from eliminating net neutrality.

The argument against net neutrality is that it kills innovation.  if an innovation comes along that improves speed or service greatly, it might have to be implemented for all customers right away under net neutrality rules.  It might make more sense to do a partial rollout to test it and build the new infrastructure over time, but that might be ILLEGAL under nn rules.  So they will just sit on the tech upgrade and never use it instead.  

 

If companies are allowed to offer superfast service using the latest tech, it can help innovation as they have a testing base to work from. 

Edited by Riversco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one has any interest in killing the internet.  Its a wonderful way for the govt to spy on its own people.  The last thing the govt wants is to use nn to force the poor off the internet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rascal said:

1) I'm an idiot.

2) Somebody break down what exactly the FCC rules are why they are needed.

TIA

I liked your post but mostly for part 2 but a little a part 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AhrnCityPahnder said:

Without it, ISPs are free to make your internet bill look like this

What tier is FBGs?  

+100 Wheat pennies?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Dedfin said:

I think mostly everyone cares about this, but they don't have it as a high priority so they will keep supporting the same #######s that are going to kill the internet.  For example I'm sure all the nerds at 4chan will be fine with it because what's more important is perpetuating the nihilist freak republicans for the lulz, so they'll be fine with hurting themselves with this garbage.  Then you have all the leftover old people born pre-1940 who 95% of them have no idea what the internet does but their church says baby jesus would be a republican, so that's what they are.  And they vote at a higher rate than anyone.  The internet is gonna die.

No it's not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Riversco said:

The argument against net neutrality is that it kills innovation.  if an innovation comes along that improves speed or service greatly, it might have to be implemented for all customers right away under net neutrality rules.  It might make more sense to do a partial rollout to test it and build the new infrastructure over time, but that might be ILLEGAL under nn rules.  So they will just sit on the tech upgrade and never use it instead.  

 

If companies are allowed to offer superfast service using the latest tech, it can help innovation as they have a testing base to work from. 

That's a cop out used by proponents of this bill. No innovation would be stifled in the least.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SHIZNITTTT said:

The biggest threat will be the "throttling" of Netflix, Amazon, and other sites where you want to watch movies and other large files.  Or, pay a #### load more money to have the access to not be "throttled!" 

Isn't this the way utilities work though?

If use more water, electricity, etc. in given month then I have to pay more. 

Don't get me wrong though, I think net neutrality is a great thing for everyone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Riversco said:

The argument against net neutrality is that it kills innovation.  if an innovation comes along that improves speed or service greatly, it might have to be implemented for all customers right away under net neutrality rules.  It might make more sense to do a partial rollout to test it and build the new infrastructure over time, but that might be ILLEGAL under nn rules.  So they will just sit on the tech upgrade and never use it instead.  

 

If companies are allowed to offer superfast service using the latest tech, it can help innovation as they have a testing base to work from. 

This is not directed at you personally because I absolutely appreciate your ell considered response.

I am so tired of hearing about the "stifling of innovation" that will occur if we even look at a precious corporation sideways. It's B.S. they will absolutely innovate because being the first to market is still the best way to make money.

@Riversco I am not sure I follow how the current net neutrality rules would require an innovator ISP to hand over their new tech to competitors. Doesn't it just require that ISPs don't hold their users hostage to speed throttling? As in they can squeeze Netflix for more cash to make sure their signal is not choppy (said costs presumably being passed on to the consumers)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, NREC34 said:

Isn't this the way utilities work though?

If use more water, electricity, etc. in given month then I have to pay more. 

Don't get me wrong though, I think net neutrality is a great thing for everyone. 

Not exactly. It's more like the water company charging you more for water that comes out of your shower than the kitchen sink. Then a different amount for the water that's used to water your lawn.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.