Total Posts:72|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Can Someone Simplify What Net Neutrality Is

YYW
Posts: 36,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 8:04:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 4:46:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 3/4/2015 1:48:53 PM, YYW wrote:
http://theoatmeal.com...

Thanks, this was helpful. Explained like I was five :-)

Glad you liked it.
Tsar of DDO
sadolite
Posts: 8,842
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 8:19:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 1:47:42 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
I read about it but I'm not sure what it means. Can someone simplify what it is for me?

Read everything and listen to everything people and govt are saying it is now. And then know it won't be anything like that when it is implemented
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 8:23:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Questions, during the same negotiation period, why are AT&T and Verizon also slowed down? And what happened to the freed up bandwidth during the time it was taken from Netflix? Did other users experience an increase in bandwidth during this same period? How do we know Comcast, and not Netflix throttled the speed as a negotiating tactic?
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.
YYW
Posts: 36,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 9:01:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Some things to consider about net neutrality:

If the object is to make telecom companies richer than they are already, then opposing net neutrality is something that you should do. But, there is basically no legitimate function to allowing ISP's to throttle content.

Here's how throttling works:

1. ISP has to identify that you are on a website that it doesn't like. (That means that you are literally being monitored. Privacy? Not more important than telecom's interest in being rich.... at least, that's the anti-net neutrality perspective.)

2. ISP slows down some websites and speeds up others. (On a substantive/functional level, it's censorship that caters to the interests of those who control access to content.)

3. Dude on the internet may be able to access some websites that bribed (or otherwise greased the palms of ISP) faster, and not access or take an incredibly long amount of time to access sites that the ISP didn't have a financial relationship with.

My biggest issue is that for throttling to be a thing that is implemented, ISP's have to monitor what you're doing on the internet. Like, they cannot oppose net neutrality without first knowing on some level what websites you are accessing.

An analogous situation would be like this:

Imagine you are driving in your car to the grocery store. You've paid your insurance, taxes and you've filled the car up, but imagine that the road is privately owned. So, because the people who own the road control access to all the grocery stores, they kind of have a unique opportunity to control who goes to what grocery store.

Suppose that Wal Mart enters into a financial relationship with a big road company... and the road company decides that while the road to Walmart will be widely paved and maintained, they're going to go destroy the asphalt that leads to Stop and Shop because Stop and Shop said "fvck you guys, we're not paying you."

Now replace roads with "the internet" and grocery stores with websites; replace your car with your computer, router, modem; replace the road company with your ISP.

This is why you should support net neutrality.

(It's also why Ted Cruz is an idiot.)
Tsar of DDO
slo1
Posts: 4,364
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2015 9:20:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
For some reason social conservatives dont believe in gov regulation when it comes to net neutrality, but believe in gov regulation to stop individuals doing something they deem immoral.

We already have the slowest internet of the developed world because internet service providers are not in a competitive space, which by the way was unregulated. I dont know why Ted Cruz can't understand that.

At least the sob could advocate the expansion or wireless internet so traditional and cable internet providers get some true competition.
omanjoka
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2015 8:35:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Net Neutrality means the internet stays fast for everyone.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
-Epicurus.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,079
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2015 8:58:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I really don't understand it; the explanation sounds good, but there's probably somebody on the other side who could provide a compelling reason not to implement it.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Daltonian
Posts: 4,797
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2015 9:49:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/6/2015 8:58:24 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
I really don't understand it; the explanation sounds good, but there's probably somebody on the other side who could provide a compelling reason not to implement it.
Reason: Capitalism and maximizing profits for corporations, even if through unfair or abusive means, outweighs the benefits of insuring fair/equal internet speeds for all people and businesses

Shoddy reason. That's pretty much the real motivation for the opposition. People will give you some spiel about the ISP providers rights to fluctuate the quality of their service at their whim because "rights for corporations", but consumer protection is an important concept. Corporations being corporations doesn't justify manipulation and abuse of the industry for purposes of self gain.
F _ C K
All I need is "u", baby
sadolite
Posts: 8,842
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2015 8:34:53 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/6/2015 8:35:46 PM, omanjoka wrote:
Net Neutrality means the internet stays fast for everyone.

You mean slows down for everyone
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,333
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2015 9:55:19 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
There has not been a single instance in the last 100 years where the government abused the commerce clause to usurp economic power that has been proven to show a net benefit for the average consumer.

I rarely agree with Sadolite, but history is a strong statistic,
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,333
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2015 10:02:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 4:46:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 3/4/2015 1:48:53 PM, YYW wrote:
http://theoatmeal.com...

Thanks, this was helpful. Explained like I was five :-)

Right, because only a six year old could figure out the logical result of net neutrality would be for Comcast to be forced by the government to actually slow the internet down equally for everyone, not just low interest consumers.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2015 12:26:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/7/2015 10:02:00 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/4/2015 4:46:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 3/4/2015 1:48:53 PM, YYW wrote:
http://theoatmeal.com...

Thanks, this was helpful. Explained like I was five :-)

Right, because only a six year old could figure out the logical result of net neutrality would be for Comcast to be forced by the government to actually slow the internet down equally for everyone, not just low interest consumers.

My point exactly. A profound gap.
Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 5:43:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 9:20:09 PM, slo1 wrote:
For some reason social conservatives dont believe in gov regulation when it comes to net neutrality, but believe in gov regulation to stop individuals doing something they deem immoral.

We already have the slowest internet of the developed world because internet service providers are not in a competitive space, which by the way was unregulated. I dont know why Ted Cruz can't understand that.

At least the sob could advocate the expansion or wireless internet so traditional and cable internet providers get some true competition.

So...to be consistent, social conservatives should be anarchists? Of course we want to regulate against immoral behavior. So do liberals with net neutrality. We don't view the actions of the companies as immoral. I could pay a lot less to get dial up, but I have cable internet. The speed is high, and so is the price. If Netflix wants to use up more of the network, they'll pay more. Any provider that wants to stay ahead of the competition will use that money to update their infrastructure so they can provide fast speeds to more customers, and boast about it in ads. I've gotten 2 free speed upgrades in the past few years, and my price has stayed the same.
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,333
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 7:34:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/11/2015 5:43:25 PM, Skynet wrote:
At 3/4/2015 9:20:09 PM, slo1 wrote:
For some reason social conservatives dont believe in gov regulation when it comes to net neutrality, but believe in gov regulation to stop individuals doing something they deem immoral.

We already have the slowest internet of the developed world because internet service providers are not in a competitive space, which by the way was unregulated. I dont know why Ted Cruz can't understand that.

At least the sob could advocate the expansion or wireless internet so traditional and cable internet providers get some true competition.

So...to be consistent, social conservatives should be anarchists? Of course we want to regulate against immoral behavior. So do liberals with net neutrality. We don't view the actions of the companies as immoral. I could pay a lot less to get dial up, but I have cable internet. The speed is high, and so is the price. If Netflix wants to use up more of the network, they'll pay more. Any provider that wants to stay ahead of the competition will use that money to update their infrastructure so they can provide fast speeds to more customers, and boast about it in ads. I've gotten 2 free speed upgrades in the past few years, and my price has stayed the same.

This law has absolutely nothing to do about social regulation. It is an economic powergrab.
Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 7:37:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/11/2015 7:34:01 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/11/2015 5:43:25 PM, Skynet wrote:
At 3/4/2015 9:20:09 PM, slo1 wrote:
For some reason social conservatives dont believe in gov regulation when it comes to net neutrality, but believe in gov regulation to stop individuals doing something they deem immoral.

We already have the slowest internet of the developed world because internet service providers are not in a competitive space, which by the way was unregulated. I dont know why Ted Cruz can't understand that.

At least the sob could advocate the expansion or wireless internet so traditional and cable internet providers get some true competition.

So...to be consistent, social conservatives should be anarchists? Of course we want to regulate against immoral behavior. So do liberals with net neutrality. We don't view the actions of the companies as immoral. I could pay a lot less to get dial up, but I have cable internet. The speed is high, and so is the price. If Netflix wants to use up more of the network, they'll pay more. Any provider that wants to stay ahead of the competition will use that money to update their infrastructure so they can provide fast speeds to more customers, and boast about it in ads. I've gotten 2 free speed upgrades in the past few years, and my price has stayed the same.

This law has absolutely nothing to do about social regulation. It is an economic powergrab.

By most of the people in power pushing it, it seems that way. But the argument they use appeals to fairness and morality, and that's the way most normal people who support it view it.
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 7:57:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 1:47:42 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
I read about it but I'm not sure what it means. Can someone simplify what it is for me?

"With the exception of open source code and public domain content, every part of the Internet is private property: property owned by someone. The content of websites is owned by its authors. The servers that house those websites are owned by hosting companies. The personal computers that access those websites are owned by Web surfers. And the data transmission lines that make all of this possible are owned by Internet service providers. Each of these parties has the right to use and dispose of his property, including the right to deal with the other parties by mutual agreement to mutual benefit. Net neutrality denies that the Internet is private property and therefore denies that its owners have these rights."

https://www.theobjectivestandard.com...

Credit to Raymond C. Niles.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 8:46:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/4/2015 8:19:16 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/4/2015 1:47:42 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
I read about it but I'm not sure what it means. Can someone simplify what it is for me?

Read everything and listen to everything people and govt are saying it is now. And then know it won't be anything like that when it is implemented

Conspiracy???
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 8:51:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/7/2015 9:55:19 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
There has not been a single instance in the last 100 years where the government abused the commerce clause to usurp economic power that has been proven to show a net benefit for the average consumer.

I rarely agree with Sadolite, but history is a strong statistic,

Please provide so specific examples of this.
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 8:53:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/7/2015 8:34:53 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/6/2015 8:35:46 PM, omanjoka wrote:
Net Neutrality means the internet stays fast for everyone.

You mean slows down for everyone

Your rationale???
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 8:55:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/7/2015 10:02:00 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/4/2015 4:46:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 3/4/2015 1:48:53 PM, YYW wrote:
http://theoatmeal.com...

Thanks, this was helpful. Explained like I was five :-)

Right, because only a six year old could figure out the logical result of net neutrality would be for Comcast to be forced by the government to actually slow the internet down equally for everyone, not just low interest consumers.

By what rationale would they do this?
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 9:03:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The FCC has regulated land line telephone service for almost a hundred years and we have enjoyed the best telephone service in the world. ISPs have been unregulated and we have the slowest internet speeds in most expensive internet service in the developed world.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,333
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 9:47:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/11/2015 8:55:36 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/7/2015 10:02:00 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/4/2015 4:46:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 3/4/2015 1:48:53 PM, YYW wrote:
http://theoatmeal.com...

Thanks, this was helpful. Explained like I was five :-)

Right, because only a six year old could figure out the logical result of net neutrality would be for Comcast to be forced by the government to actually slow the internet down equally for everyone, not just low interest consumers.

By what rationale would they do this?

Because the internet is not "free"

Someone has to pay for it... and it aint gonna be the low interest consumer...
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,333
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 9:50:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/11/2015 9:03:15 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
The FCC has regulated land line telephone service for almost a hundred years and we have enjoyed the best telephone service in the world. ISPs have been unregulated and we have the slowest internet speeds in most expensive internet service in the developed world.

If that was true, we would still have phoneline modems.
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 9:58:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/11/2015 9:50:21 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/11/2015 9:03:15 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
The FCC has regulated land line telephone service for almost a hundred years and we have enjoyed the best telephone service in the world. ISPs have been unregulated and we have the slowest internet speeds in most expensive internet service in the developed world.

If that was true, we would still have phoneline modems.

And your rationale for that is???????
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 10:01:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/11/2015 9:47:45 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/11/2015 8:55:36 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/7/2015 10:02:00 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/4/2015 4:46:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 3/4/2015 1:48:53 PM, YYW wrote:
http://theoatmeal.com...

Thanks, this was helpful. Explained like I was five :-)

Right, because only a six year old could figure out the logical result of net neutrality would be for Comcast to be forced by the government to actually slow the internet down equally for everyone, not just low interest consumers.

By what rationale would they do this?

Because the internet is not "free"

Someone has to pay for it... and it aint gonna be the low interest consumer...

Excuse me? Who is paying now? Comcast and Time Warner??? No one is paying my bills for me!!!
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 10:13:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
There is some small town, I can't remember the name, I think it's in Tennessee, that formed their own public ISP. They had 100 Mbps service for like 1/2 the cost of Time Warner or whoever it was. Of course the for profit ISP screamed bloody murder!!! FOUL FOUL FOUL.

Guess they couldn't handle the competition.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,333
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 10:20:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/11/2015 10:01:58 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/11/2015 9:47:45 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/11/2015 8:55:36 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/7/2015 10:02:00 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/4/2015 4:46:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 3/4/2015 1:48:53 PM, YYW wrote:
http://theoatmeal.com...

Thanks, this was helpful. Explained like I was five :-)

Right, because only a six year old could figure out the logical result of net neutrality would be for Comcast to be forced by the government to actually slow the internet down equally for everyone, not just low interest consumers.

By what rationale would they do this?

Because the internet is not "free"

Someone has to pay for it... and it aint gonna be the low interest consumer...

Excuse me? Who is paying now? Comcast and Time Warner??? No one is paying my bills for me!!!

You obviously have not heard of mandatory zoned business rates.