Would anyone provide personal examples as to how your internet experience has improved since 2015? My own personal experience was unchanged.
English
-
So think of it like this: The Internet is still a pretty young concept. I think people will look back on even now and consider 2017 to be the infancy of the Internet. We're at a point where two major things have happened: 1) The infrastructure and knowledge of the Internet is sophisticated enough for mega corporations to monopolize it like cable. 2) America's political institutions have become so eroded that voting is a joke and specially the Republican Party operate exclusively for the extreme wealthy and giant corporations. So net neutrality was introduced to cut off the changing climate that saw giant companies increasingly circling the Internet like sharks. So when you hear people defend this decision on the basis that "things were fine before" it's because these regulations were introduced just at a time when net neutrality was coming under threat.
-
[quote]The Internet is still a pretty young concept.[/quote] Lol, what?
-
Absolutely. The Internet itself as a concept is about what 60 years old? As something that's been mass adopted it's about 25 years or so old? The Internet has been one of the most impactful things in human history and will probably last as long as our species does. When we're looking at that time frame then yes, the Internet is pretty young.
-
Nothing changing doesn't mean that NN did nothing. If anything, it is evidence that NN accomplished what it was supposed to, more or less. ISPs have made it quite clear (by their own accounts) that they are the ones that want things to change. If NN is what is stopping that change, then having nothing change is what NN was supposed to do...
-
[quote]Nothing changing doesn't mean that NN did nothing. If anything, it is evidence that NN accomplished what it was supposed to, more or less. ISPs have made it quite clear (by their own accounts) that they are the ones that want things to change. If NN is what is stopping that change, then having nothing change is what NN was supposed to do...[/quote]I see. I have friends and relatives who do not have access to broadband internet outside of satellite providers. Nothing has changed for them. Was this lack of broadband availability intended by Net Neutrality? Is the near stagnant expansion of broadband infrastructure also intended, as well as, the lack of upgrading outdated infrastructure? Is the perpetuation of the lack of incentive to introduce more competition in the ISP market also intended? If none of this was intended by the Net Neutrality regulation, then what exactly was its intention?
-
[quote]I have friends and relatives who do not have access to broadband internet outside of satellite providers. Nothing has changed for them. Was this lack of broadband availability intended by Net Neutrality?[/quote] Did they have access before NN? Can you viably argue that NN kept them from gaining access since the time before NN? [quote]Is the near stagnant expansion of broadband infrastructure also intended, as well as, the lack of upgrading outdated infrastructure?[/quote] Was expansion "stagnant" before NN? Can you show exactly how NN caused it to become stagnant and viably argue that nothing else caused it? [quote]Is the perpetuation of the lack of incentive to introduce more competition in the ISP market also intended?[/quote] If repealing NN increases competition and doesn't just benefit big business, why do the large ISPs want to repeal it? Why are they in favor of something that isn't supposed to benefit them? Wouldn't they prefer something that decreases competition with other businesses? [quote]If none of this was intended by the Net Neutrality regulation, then what exactly was its intention?[/quote] You are implying a lot of false equivalences on what NN is and what it can affect.
-
That is my point. I have no idea what its purpose was if it has done nothing to increase broadband availability, done nothing to improve broadband service, and done nothing to increase broadband service competition. If you know Net Neutrality's purpose, please spell it out for me.
-
You can find its purpose by just googling it quite easily. NN was never intended to change anything regarding availability, quality of service, or affect broadband competition. The rules are to improve general competition and enforce universal and consistent availability of websites. To keep ISPs from controlling competition and access to online goods and services. To put it overly simply.
-
[quote] The rules are to improve general competition and enforce universal and consistent availability of websites. To keep ISPs from controlling competition and access to online goods and services. To put it overly simply.[/quote] Why didn't they do this pre net neutrality?
-
You mean like all of the NN violations that ISPs have attempted over the years, including before 2015?
-
[quote]before 2015?[/quote] Seems more like [url=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_Open_Internet_Order_2010]before 2010[/url] to me.
-
There's been more than a few, to be sure.
-
Edited by tjustie: 12/17/2017 9:58:12 PMMy point is that everybody keeps saying "before 2015" as if 2015 is when formal net neutrality regulations were first put in place, when the first Open Internet Regulations were actually put in place in 2010, and existed until 2014 when they were overturned by a court. That's what prompted the 2015 rules, the main purpose of which was to reimplement the 2010 rules. "Net Neutrality" as people talk about it, has existed for the last seven years, not just two.
-
I'm aware.
-
-
-
-
How many is all?
-
I haven’t counted and it doesn’t matter...
-
So, no knowledge on it yet you comment...
-
Are you implying that there's never been a NN violation?
-
Not at all.
-
Good.
-
Except it did do those things by requiring broadcast licensing and having to present plans for all actions an ISP takes to the FCC where the FCC can then choose for any reason to approve or deny such plans. This is a clear direct policy that hurts new businesses that'd have to pay to get licensed and suffer many delays in creating/expanding their company by having to submit and wait for everything they do. So what did they do exactly to improve competition?
-
Edited by tjustie: 12/16/2017 7:17:45 AM[quote]Except it did do those things by requiring broadcast licensing and having to present plans for all actions an ISP takes to the FCC where the FCC can then choose for any reason to approve or deny such plans.[/quote] What specific section of Title II compels ISPs to do this?