SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Democrats' Net Neutrality Bill Survives First Vote:
A bill backed by House Democrats to reinstate Obama-era net neutrality protections passed its first hurdle Tuesday.
Democrats pushed the Save the Internet Act through the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee in an 18-11 vote that fell along party lines. The legislation codifies rules that were repealed in December 2017 by the Republican-led FCC. As part of this repeal, the FCC abdicated its authority to protect consumers online to the Federal Trade Commission.
The bill introduced by Democrats is an attempt to end a nearly two-decade-old fight over how best to prevent broadband companies from abusing their power as gatekeepers to the internet. Specifically, it prevents broadband providers from blocking, slowing down or charging for faster access to the internet. But it also restores the FCC's authority as the "cop on the beat" when it comes to policing potential broadband abuses.
Republicans have criticized the legislation as giving the FCC too much authority to regulate ISPs.
What are the odds that it will pass?
(Score: 3, Informative) by Thexalon on Wednesday March 27 2019, @02:31PM (4 children)
There's about a welk's chance in a supernova of this actually becoming law. The Democrats passing this I'm sure reassured their donors in the telecommunications industries that this was just grandstanding for the cameras for the upcoming election, but there's no way Mitch McConnell is bringing this to a vote, and even less chance Donald Trump signs it.
There are 2 reasons politicians hate net neutrality:
1. They're getting paid handsomely to hate net neutrality. As with most everything else in Washington, it's all about the benjamins.
2. It eliminates their ability to unofficially censor what people are reading online, and that's something they definitely want. They'll do that unofficially by working with their pals at Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc, rather than through official laws, but the long-term goal is to return to a world where the information you get is information that those with power approved of.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday March 27 2019, @04:36PM (3 children)
Democrats ALREADY implemented Net Neutrality once.
Republicans repealed it.
Democrats are trying to implement it AGAIN but they're actually just pretending this time?
That's a load of "both sides" bullshit.
Democrats are Pro Net Neutrality, PERIOD. Enough with the false equivalency.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @04:58PM
Yeah, I didn't realize how pernicious that meme was until the last 6 months or so. Republicans have become so shitty that they make every Democrat look like a saint. Seriously, the level of hypocrisy even with their own responsibilities is making Republicans look like cartoon villains.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday March 27 2019, @08:06PM (1 child)
Some Democrats are pro net neutrality. Other Democrats have spoken against it. Still others are trying to have it both ways, being for net neutrality when they're talking to the public or to tech firms, and anti-net neutrality when talking to telecoms.
The Obama administration was for net neutrality. That's not the same thing as all Democrats being for net neutrality, because the Democrats are not anywhere near unified on many issues.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday March 27 2019, @09:06PM
100% of Democrats just voted FOR net neutrality
100% of Republicans just voted AGAINST net neutrality.
Those are not the exact same. In fact, they are the exact opposite.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DannyB on Wednesday March 27 2019, @03:01PM (4 children)
Dear Republicans:
Regulation is what governments are supposed to do when private companies go too far.
It's why we regulate air quality, water quality, pollution, food and drug ingredients, and yes - - the intarweb tubes.
If the ISPs don't like it, too bad -- they brought it on themselves.
Net Neutrality is how things always once were -- how they should be.
ISPs should be BIG DUMB PIPES. Nothing more. They should efficiently route my packets and nothing more. No injecting new content. No removing or altering content. No injection of JavaScript into web pages. No DNS monkey business. Just BIG DUMB PIPES.
In fact the ISPs could compete on who could be the best big dumb pipes at the best prices!
Young people won't believe you if you say you used to get Netflix by US Postal Mail.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday March 27 2019, @03:48PM (3 children)
Sorry - I want to agree with you, but it just ain't so. Things always once were like the wild wild west. It was pretty much unregulated, and the tech giants wrote their own rules. We liked some of those rules, we didn't like other rules. O'Bummer's administration made net neutrality a thing. I happened to like the idea, because, reasons. Trump doesn't much like the idea, so he overturned a former executive's executive actions. Since he's the current executive, he can do that. He can replace a former executives heads of various departments with his own heads of departments. In the case of Pai-hole, I don't like that, because - well, more reasons.
I agree that ISP's should be dumb pipes. And, the bigger the better - where most people have a half inch pipe for their internet supply, I have a little tubing that has to measured with a micrometer.
Unless, and until, a law is actually written that makes the pipes big and dumb, the people who own them can kinda do whatever the hell they want with them. Wild, wild west style.
This is a large part of the reason I use PIA's VPN - my ISP doesn't need to know ANYTHING about my network traffic, other than "How do I route this guy's packets?"
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by DannyB on Wednesday March 27 2019, @04:31PM
I would be happy for Net Neutrality to be enshrined as law. Short of that I would be equally happy, and get exactly the same result, if it were imposed as regulation by the FCC instead of congress.
Whether the executive branch would do it (Obama) or congress, I don't care as long as I get net neutrality. Big dumb pipes. No slow lanes. No monkeying with or discriminating against packets.
I would be fine if it were a constitutional amendment.
Young people won't believe you if you say you used to get Netflix by US Postal Mail.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by NewNic on Wednesday March 27 2019, @08:20PM (1 child)
Translation:
Obama did something I like, but I still support Trump because of reasons(*).
* Racism.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday March 28 2019, @01:59AM
That refrain gets so tiresome. We've all forgotten that Trump was a liberal. He was Hollywood's and the Democrat's Golden Boy for decades. Trump was admired by most of America, right up until he announced that he was running for president. Want to see what black folk - some rather important black folk - are saying about Racist Trump? https://americanlookout.com/historically-black-college-leader-so-far-trump-is-better-than-obama/ [americanlookout.com]
Just for fun, you can search the web for photos of Trump with black people. Plug in the names of your favorite black activists, artists, famous and infamous black people. Loads of them have shown up at Trump events over the years.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by ilsa on Wednesday March 27 2019, @03:03PM (23 children)
So Republicans voted against the bill, despite the fact that all evidence as well as their their constituents are overhwhelmingly in favour of it.
Someone explain to me again how the entire Republican party *isn't* a bunch of petty, corrupt, douchebags?
I remind everyone that this isn't an isolated incident either. Republicans have a firm policy of democrat obstructionism at any cost. They've even admitted to it.
And just to save time, don't even start with the whataboutism. No, the Democrats arn't perfect. But at least with the Democrats, the problem isn't systemic and intentional. It's like saying that the Republicans are justified in using nukes on a regular basis just cause a democrat once threw a molotov cocktail.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday March 27 2019, @03:11PM
They are.
But let's not discriminate against and exclude the Democrats from the corruption party.
Are these douchebags you speak of, some kind of party favors handed out at each corruption event?
Young people won't believe you if you say you used to get Netflix by US Postal Mail.
(Score: 2, Offtopic) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday March 27 2019, @03:51PM (9 children)
That's why Bernie Sanders won the Democrat's nomination for the presidency.
If you don't want whataboutism in response to your post, then don't post obvious falsehoods. Deal?
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @05:01PM (1 child)
As usual you're dumb as a box of rocks.
"And just to save time, don't even start with the whataboutism. No, the Democrats arn't perfect. But at least with the Democrats, the problem isn't systemic and intentional."
Your blind faith and tribalism is stupid. You are stupid. There is apparently no cure for you except a doctor who loves their smartphone more than their job.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday March 27 2019, @05:12PM
I'm not a time-saving (or labor-saving) appliance, so just get stuffed.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @05:19PM
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/03/27/barbara-bush-blamed-trump-heart-attack-leaving-gop-the-matriarch/3270187002/ [usatoday.com]
hahahahahahahahhaha
Get wrekt you intellectual baby! Apparently Nancy Reagan also wanted a state funeral so that GOP turds couldn't use Reagan's memorial for their own political gain.
You are right, you're not a time saving device you're a bidet. You wash shit out of assholes to make them look clean and you guzzle down that shit water. Nice work!!
You are truly the last bastion of hope for the US of A /s lawl roflattackcopter
(Score: 5, Insightful) by ilsa on Wednesday March 27 2019, @05:35PM (5 children)
Once again you are taking one incident and claiming that that is equivalent to a systemic problem.
Yes, that whole DNC thing was bullshit. And the Democrats paid very dearly for it. I seriously doubt they are going to do something like that again. Even then, this was an internal party matter that didn't negatively impact anyone outside of the ranks of the democrats. (Losing to Trump notwithstanding...)
Again, compare that to the Republicans who have made it the party mandate to vote against *anything* the Democrats want, no matter what. This is something that they have even admitted to. Worse yet, they must *undo* anything the Democrats might have already done, no matter how trivial (like f__king lightbulbs...). The Republicans have literally spent more time trying to dismantle what the democrats did the previous term, than actually accomplish anything themselves. I'm not aware of the Democrats every spending their entire term doing nothing else but undoing everything the Republicans did.
Hell, they've even shut down the bloody government because they couldn't agree with *each other*, when they had a majority in all branches of US gov't. Hell, it's been two years since Trump won and he's *still* railing against Hilary. Speaking of which, have the finally stopped having investigations into Hilary? I stopped counting at *13*.
You seriously don't consider all this behaviour to be seriously mentally unbalanced?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday March 27 2019, @05:58PM (3 children)
*cough*
When the head of the DNC corrupts the structure from top to bottom, dictating from day one who will ultimately be the party's nominee, that is pretty systemic. Shultz had to resign in disgrace when it was finally discovered how thoroughly she corrupted the process. Hillary, however, never had any grace, so she couldn't be disgraced.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @06:27PM (1 child)
So.... HILLARY!! EMAILS!!!! BENGHAZI!!@!
Sorry what were we talking about? Problems with MY party? Surely you must be mistaken, there are plenty of horrible people on BOTH SIDES! trollololol
fuck off already runaway, isn't that why you chose the name?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday March 27 2019, @06:53PM
Ho-hum. I'm the runaway, because, naturally enough, I left home without permission. That is a terrible crime for a minor to commit, isn't it? Now that you've had the obvious explained to you - do you have any other silly questions?
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2) by ilsa on Monday April 01 2019, @08:04PM
Thank you for proving my point. Yes, there was a shitstorm thanks to some idiot. And what happened? They were forced to resign and the DNC learned a valuable lesson. Finally, said person didn't have control of the party in any way shape or form. Systemic is *exactly* what it *wasn't*.
I don't think you even know what the word "systemic" even means, not to mention I question your sense of proportion, or your ability to look critically at the facts, if you think that that is in any way equivalent to the way the entire republican party, from the leadership right to the rank and file, conduct themselves.
I'm not going to argue with you on this any further because it's clear there's no point. I'm looking at the facts first, then making up my opinion based on that information. You're putting your tribalism and ideology first, and then looking for facts to fit your preconceived notions.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 29 2019, @04:33AM
It is a systemic problem. Look at how many Democrats take corporate pac money or do bundling.
If there weren't a systemic problem, we wouldn't need organizations like the Justice Democrats to primary corporate Democrats, and we wouldn't have such a tough time getting prominent Democrats to support popular policies like single-payer Medicare For All. Many of the corporate Democratic primary candidates (like Gillibrand, Harris, and Booker) use weasel words to make it sound like they support single payer without actually doing so, or outright oppose it.
The reality is that the Democratic Party, while less corrupt than the Republican Party, is still corrupt, and has serious systemic issues.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday March 27 2019, @04:22PM (11 children)
Someone explain to me again how the entire Republican party *isn't* a bunch of petty, corrupt, douchebags?
You think it matters to the people that vote for them?
But at least with the Democrats, the problem isn't systemic and intentional.
Bet you a dollar that you're wrong. Democrats just have a nicer facade. Pastels, that would describe them best
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @05:04PM (10 children)
Just looked at the voting patterns of the last 11 years and you owe everyone here a dollar.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday March 27 2019, @05:29PM (9 children)
Oh please! Go back 50!* I'll be rich!
* and learn the art of "villain rotation". You will see just how deeply systemic and intentional it is.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday March 27 2019, @06:03PM
They won't go back to 1964.
"The Congressional Quarterly of June 26, 1964 recorded that in the
Senate, only 69 percent of Democrats (46 for, 21 against) voted for
the Civil Rights Act as compared to 82 percent of Republicans (27 for,
6 against). All southern Democratic senators voted against the act.
[...] In the House of Representatives, 61 percent of Democrats (152
for, 96 against) voted for the Civil Rights Act; 92 of the 103
Southern Democrats voted against it. Among Republicans, 80 percent
(138 for, 34 against) voted for it."
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @06:31PM (5 children)
We all realize that, you are the only one so fixated on it that you'd rather do nothing than something. Almost everyone here could rattle off a few good plans on a variety of topics, but until you factor in reality it is pointless. Perhaps you should examine the $1 bill for some good CLUES to uncover THE TRUTH?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @06:58PM (4 children)
you'd rather do nothing than something
*sigh* boilerplate bullshit from a partisan tribe... so primitive!
The truth was never "covered".. Your blinders are just opaque.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @07:01PM (3 children)
dummy addresses the joking aspect of a comment, top minds FTW!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @07:07PM (2 children)
"joking" riiiiight!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @10:28PM (1 child)
If you are unable to comprehend that "Perhaps you should examine the $1 bill for some good CLUES to uncover THE TRUTH?" is a joke then you have serious problems. It was a reference to the shitty Illuminati conspiracies, best exemplified in that Nicholas Cage treasure hunt movie.
Don't be surprised the next time someone calls you a moron, it has nothing to do with the sprinkles on your ice cream.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hlt3rA-oDao [youtube.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 28 2019, @12:35AM
I'm not impressed with your silly Illuminati cliches. Not a big follower, though the books were hilarious. Not my fault if your "joke" flopped. I took issue with something entirely different in the same post.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday March 27 2019, @11:52PM (1 child)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday March 28 2019, @12:45AM
party lines = contributors/lobbyists demands
or the money goes elsewhere. It's strictly business. And the democrats are indistinguishable from the republicans, aside from that they (democrats) have to play two sides to keep the "liberal" money in the corral. The republicans don't have this issue. What both have to do is keep third parties from getting any attention/money.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DannyB on Wednesday March 27 2019, @03:18PM (15 children)
Why we need Net Neutrality
Netflix pays handsomely for it's bandwidth at its end of the connection. So does HBO.
If I am having trouble getting Netflix at my residence, then that is MY ISP's problem -- not Netflix. It is not "Netflix is using too much bandwidth". It is ME, THE ISP CUSTOMER who is using too much bandwidth. Then the ISP should CHARGE ME FOR IT. After all, I'm going to end up paying for it anyway. (see below)
My ISP should be charging me to build out their network to provide the service I need, and make a reasonable profit.
My ISP should not be trying to make their price look artificially small by shifting some of my ISP bill into my Netflix / HBO bill, making it look higher to pay for my ISP service.
Just as Netflix / HBO pays for it's end of the connection, I should pay for my end.
It should be simple, fair and neutral. It doesn't matter what I am using the bandwidth for. That great bandwidth for Netflix should also be great for anything else I connect to. There shouldn't be paid prioritization.
Paid prioritization IS NOT creating fast lanes, it is actually just creating slow lanes.
It is a scam to extort money from major network properties.
AT&T (for example) goes to Netflix: pay us money and we'll make sure that AT&T customers connecting to Netflix get good connections.
Result: Netflix pays. The price is absorbed into Netflix's prices, so everyone on Netflix (including Verizon users, for example) are subsidizing AT&T customers connecting to Netflix.
Verizon (for example) goes to HBO: pay us money and we'll make sure that Verizon customers connecting to HBO get good connections.
Result: HBO pays. The price is absorbed into HBO prices, so everyone on HBO (including AT&T users, for example) are subsidizing Verizon customers connecting to HBO.
Young people won't believe you if you say you used to get Netflix by US Postal Mail.
(Score: 2) by Snow on Wednesday March 27 2019, @03:36PM (3 children)
Oh sweetie. It's so cute that you think that you'll get a discount on your home connection just because Netflix/HBO pay your ISP.
(Score: 4, Informative) by DannyB on Wednesday March 27 2019, @04:21PM
I do not think I get a discount. I think that the ISP wants me to think that. Or to think that for my same price I get magically great connections to Netflix, but not to other things. Or I get unlimited bandwidth to Netflix, but not other things.
In the end, I will end up paying for all of the infrastructure necessary to deliver that bandwidth to my home. There is no discount.
So why not just charge it to me directly in my ISP bill without the ISP asking Netflix for "paid prioritization".
Young people won't believe you if you say you used to get Netflix by US Postal Mail.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @04:33PM
It's so cute that you think that you'll get a discount on your home connection just because Netflix/HBO pay your ISP.
Where's the logic in that? Netflix/HBO pays their ISP for their service, you pay your ISP for yours. Or maybe I didn't see the "/s" tag...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @05:15PM
Reading comprehension FTW!
(you lost btw)
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday March 27 2019, @04:04PM (10 children)
There's a small bit of that you seemed to miss. My ISP does not get any portion of that HBO money, or Netflix money. My ISP watches AT&T and Verizon extort money from those big guys, and asks, "Why don't I get any of that extortion money? Oh - I'll extort my money from MY customers!" And all of use who are condemned to pay small town monopolies for our internet access are charged for special deals.
I've recently signed a new contract with the only ISP in town. This time around, they didn't offer to sell me a modem. It's leased. And, the password is non-default. That is, they changed the password, and possibly the default user, so that I can't access the modem's internals. I'm using my own modem, because I don't want them to know any more than absolutely necessary about my traffic. Meanwhile, I'm working on cracking the user/password combination. So far, I haven't got a brute force cracker working properly on it. Ehhhh - it's another one of those things I wish I had more time for.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday March 27 2019, @04:24PM (7 children)
For $5 a month you can set up a low end virtual private server on Digital Ocean or on Linode. Tunnel traffic from your router to that. It's an extra hop, but your ISP doesn't know what you're doing.
You would have to watch out for any bandwidth limitation on a low end VPS.
Young people won't believe you if you say you used to get Netflix by US Postal Mail.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday March 27 2019, @04:41PM (6 children)
That's just another man in the middle... And it sounds like it's trivial for the ISP to block, should the order ever come down.
So far still, the ISP is the weakest link. The connection is too frail, subject to the whims of any two bit dictator that comes along. Legislation can't protect us from that. There has to be a technical solution for this very social problem.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday March 27 2019, @05:30PM (5 children)
I'm talking only about privacy.
If you're doing something that would get you blocked by a court order, then that is a whole different business.
A two bit dictator who thinks he's a 2^32 bit dictator could also trumple on your right to electrical power, sewer service, clean water, etc. Far worse things than the internet.
Young people won't believe you if you say you used to get Netflix by US Postal Mail.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday March 27 2019, @05:45PM (4 children)
A two bit dictator who thinks he's a 2^32 bit dictator could also trumple on your right to electrical power, sewer service, clean water, etc. Far worse things than the internet.
Well yeah, they can bomb your house and shoot the dog too. The idea is that we need a robust connection, resistant to interference. Solar and water (if it rains a lot) are easier to find.
And we're not just talking about court orders. You get crap like they're doing in New Zealand. That's the ISPs doing the censorship. That is unacceptable, exactly the kind of damage we're supposed to be able to route around. You can't do that when you're tethered to BigCorp Telecom. And if they don't want you to have privacy, you won't have privacy. All those VPNs VPSs are too easy to block.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday March 27 2019, @06:58PM (3 children)
> You get crap like they're doing in New Zealand.
That's why I'm talking about hopping through a VPS.
At least the ISP doesn't know I'm looking at a forbidden manifesto.
But the site that ultimately served it would know. And might have a log.
Young people won't believe you if you say you used to get Netflix by US Postal Mail.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday March 27 2019, @07:05PM (2 children)
At least the ISP doesn't know...
Only for lack of interest. First, they have deep packet inspection. Second, they can block "unauthorized" encrypted packets that they can't read. The ISP is a government agent. The ISP is a monkey trap.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday March 27 2019, @08:26PM (1 child)
Deep Packet Inspection doesn't help with encrypted packets. And that is my purpose with bouncing traffic through a VPS. I have also done this with my phone before on insecure WiFI places. And on a Netbook back when that was a thing -- remember those? All the ISP sees is SSN or VPN or other encrypted traffic.
As for blocking *unauthorized* encrypted packets, how to they determine what is unauthorized?
Especially an SSH. Why would an SSH connection to a cloud host be unauthorized?
Other than out of pure spite in wanting to trumple on people's rights.
Young people won't believe you if you say you used to get Netflix by US Postal Mail.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday March 27 2019, @09:02PM
Other than out of pure spite in wanting to trumple on people's rights.
That would be one reason. Also if the government wants to restrict the use of encryption, the ISP will block those encrypted packets that don't go straight to your bank or other authorized institution (who will gladly cough up anything the authorities want to know). The ISP has absolute control over your connection. We are at their mercy until we find a way around them. Doesn't mean you shouldn't use encryption, use it while you can, just know that it can be easily cut off.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday March 27 2019, @11:57PM (1 child)
If not, can you interpose a box of your own behind your modem but in front of their modem that sniffs any attempts for them to control their modem?
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday March 28 2019, @01:40AM
I probably can extract the data on the hard drive, but I haven't yet figured out how to do so. I'm just too busy to devote the time right now.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Wednesday March 27 2019, @05:22PM (5 children)
I'd say the only reason the FCC should be considered more appropriate is regulatory capture, but since the FCC has had regulatory capture also, why does it make a difference? Both design the rules to favor the large corporations. Otherwise the local ISPs wouldn't have folded. Net neutrality is only one part of a larger picture. I'll agree that it's an important point, but centralization is even worse. And I'm not totally against paying for faster service if there's a competitive market...that will remain a competitive market.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday March 27 2019, @05:48PM (3 children)
What are we using the internet for right now?
Is this communication, or is it trade?
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Wednesday March 27 2019, @08:20PM (1 child)
The thing is, it's both. Communication *is* trading information.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday March 27 2019, @11:59PM
This means that the ISPs should be nothing more than dumb pipes. The service they trade is, or at least should be, "a connection", nothing more.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 28 2019, @03:51AM
Definitely both. I for one pay for my connection. Many people shop online. And it's certainly cross state, even global.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday March 27 2019, @06:59PM
I almost read that as PRAYING.
Young people won't believe you if you say you used to get Netflix by US Postal Mail.
(Score: 2) by Bogsnoticus on Wednesday March 27 2019, @11:43PM (1 child)
Because it doesn't have a catchy acronym, like PATRIOT, HELLPP and the others made up by jizzwaffles who think a name is more important than the bill.
Genius by birth. Evil by choice.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday March 28 2019, @12:06AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves