WaGuns.org

Selador wrote:I understood previously. I was just yanking your chains.

Why? Because it is fun watching people who get 100mb or greater downloads as cheap as 30 dollars a month, complaining that they might be slowed down to 50mb, or have to pay an extra ten bucks... while I am getting an average 3mb download, for 75 dollars a month.

When I have the same as you do, then, I will be as concerned about what you have, as you are. Until then, I'll poke fun.

This is not a socialist rant. We don't share the same highway.

The speed on my highway is not going to improve. (Internet highway, in case that has become a foggy point.) That has been made clear to us already. (But if it slows down any worse than it already has, TPTB will, and have already find/found that they may still have their bread, but it doesn't taste quite as good without our butter. They have figured out already just how little they can offer us, before they lose us completely. And that is what we are getting. People out here tend to 'get a life', when urban 'necessities' become scarce, or too expensive.)

And no one on any other highway cares about our highway.

You don't care about the traffic on my highway, don't expect me to care that the traffic on yours might slow down to some multiple of mine. While still costing some fraction of mine.

sinus211 wrote:

Selador wrote:I understood previously. I was just yanking your chains.

Why? Because it is fun watching people who get 100mb or greater downloads as cheap as 30 dollars a month, complaining that they might be slowed down to 50mb, or have to pay an extra ten bucks... while I am getting an average 3mb download, for 75 dollars a month.

When I have the same as you do, then, I will be as concerned about what you have, as you are. Until then, I'll poke fun.

This is not a socialist rant. We don't share the same highway.

The speed on my highway is not going to improve. (Internet highway, in case that has become a foggy point.) That has been made clear to us already. (But if it slows down any worse than it already has, TPTB will, and have already find/found that they may still have their bread, but it doesn't taste quite as good without our butter. They have figured out already just how little they can offer us, before they lose us completely. And that is what we are getting. People out here tend to 'get a life', when urban 'necessities' become scarce, or too expensive.)

And no one on any other highway cares about our highway.

You don't care about the traffic on my highway, don't expect me to care that the traffic on yours might slow down to some multiple of mine. While still costing some fraction of mine.

Freakin communist!

snozzberries wrote:

BadKarma wrote:Sorry, you don't get to drive a lambo just because someone else can afford that car. You pay for what you get. You should not be forcing ISPs to give away free infrastructure.

What are you talking about? Nobody is forcing anybody to give away anything for free.

Look at this from our admins perspective. They pay for web server, web hosting, bandwidth, both speed and total capacity. Without Net Neutrality, they will get throttled to the 10% speed lane. So then they can pay a 2nd time to get what they were paying for already. Only this time, they'll have to pay your ISP, and my ISP, and everybody else's ISP. Or maybe you and I will have to pay our ISP to get it to load the WaGuns website at 100% speed, instead of 10% speed. Maybe our ISP will charge both of us. So the admins pay their ISP, and our ISP, they pay twice, for the same data. Then you and I pay our own ISP twice, once for our internet, and a 2nd time to have it run at 100%.

From your car perspective, you do get what you pay for. You pay for your internet, you expect it to work. You don't buy a car, and then pay extra each month based upon where they set the governor.

BadKarma wrote:

snozzberries wrote:

BadKarma wrote:Sorry, you don't get to drive a lambo just because someone else can afford that car. You pay for what you get. You should not be forcing ISPs to give away free infrastructure.

What are you talking about? Nobody is forcing anybody to give away anything for free.

Look at this from our admins perspective. They pay for web server, web hosting, bandwidth, both speed and total capacity. Without Net Neutrality, they will get throttled to the 10% speed lane. So then they can pay a 2nd time to get what they were paying for already. Only this time, they'll have to pay your ISP, and my ISP, and everybody else's ISP. Or maybe you and I will have to pay our ISP to get it to load the WaGuns website at 100% speed, instead of 10% speed. Maybe our ISP will charge both of us. So the admins pay their ISP, and our ISP, they pay twice, for the same data. Then you and I pay our own ISP twice, once for our internet, and a 2nd time to have it run at 100%.

From your car perspective, you do get what you pay for. You pay for your internet, you expect it to work. You don't buy a car, and then pay extra each month based upon where they set the governor.

Nope. It will drive competition. You have what you have now. If they decide to change it then change carriers. The market drives the rates. Just because you can afford a T-1 to your house doesn't mean I should pay less and get the same bandwidth/speed...

BadKarma wrote:

snozzberries wrote:

BadKarma wrote:Sorry, you don't get to drive a lambo just because someone else can afford that car. You pay for what you get. You should not be forcing ISPs to give away free infrastructure.

What are you talking about? Nobody is forcing anybody to give away anything for free.

Look at this from our admins perspective. They pay for web server, web hosting, bandwidth, both speed and total capacity. Without Net Neutrality, they will get throttled to the 10% speed lane. So then they can pay a 2nd time to get what they were paying for already. Only this time, they'll have to pay your ISP, and my ISP, and everybody else's ISP. Or maybe you and I will have to pay our ISP to get it to load the WaGuns website at 100% speed, instead of 10% speed. Maybe our ISP will charge both of us. So the admins pay their ISP, and our ISP, they pay twice, for the same data. Then you and I pay our own ISP twice, once for our internet, and a 2nd time to have it run at 100%.

From your car perspective, you do get what you pay for. You pay for your internet, you expect it to work. You don't buy a car, and then pay extra each month based upon where they set the governor.

Nope. It will drive competition. You have what you have now. If they decide to change it then change carriers. The market drives the rates. Just because you can afford a T-1 to your house doesn't mean I should pay less and get the same bandwidth/speed...

delliottg wrote:

BadKarma wrote:

snozzberries wrote:

BadKarma wrote:Sorry, you don't get to drive a lambo just because someone else can afford that car. You pay for what you get. You should not be forcing ISPs to give away free infrastructure.

What are you talking about? Nobody is forcing anybody to give away anything for free.

Look at this from our admins perspective. They pay for web server, web hosting, bandwidth, both speed and total capacity. Without Net Neutrality, they will get throttled to the 10% speed lane. So then they can pay a 2nd time to get what they were paying for already. Only this time, they'll have to pay your ISP, and my ISP, and everybody else's ISP. Or maybe you and I will have to pay our ISP to get it to load the WaGuns website at 100% speed, instead of 10% speed. Maybe our ISP will charge both of us. So the admins pay their ISP, and our ISP, they pay twice, for the same data. Then you and I pay our own ISP twice, once for our internet, and a 2nd time to have it run at 100%.

From your car perspective, you do get what you pay for. You pay for your internet, you expect it to work. You don't buy a car, and then pay extra each month based upon where they set the governor.

Nope. It will drive competition. You have what you have now. If they decide to change it then change carriers. The market drives the rates. Just because you can afford a T-1 to your house doesn't mean I should pay less and get the same bandwidth/speed...

The problem with this is well highlighted in the Duvall area, there are really only about 3 choices for an ISP, Wave, where you can get very fast speeds up and down, Frontier, which is DSL and has nowhere near the speed of Wave, and Hughes which is even slower than Frontier (and probably more expensive, although I don't know).

If Wave decides to throttle/block/whatever, but you still want fast speeds and unrestricted access, there's nowhere else to go, you're basically locked into Wave because there's zero competition (in our area) and stuck paying the extra fees for what you want, and no options if they decide to block, say porn, or WaGuns because they don't agree with the content on those sites.

BadKarma wrote:We have more choices. ATT, Verizon and TMO are all carriers for cellular service which you can purchase PUCKs from. We happen to have a carrier(WAVE) that is decided by the city council. Same with areas in Tacoma, Seattle etc... So, you have carriers decided by the city. My point is we have choices and if one choice limits access to the point that it makes it financially not viable to purchase, then change carriers.

Selador wrote:

BadKarma wrote:We have more choices. ATT, Verizon and TMO are all carriers for cellular service which you can purchase PUCKs from. We happen to have a carrier(WAVE) that is decided by the city council. Same with areas in Tacoma, Seattle etc... So, you have carriers decided by the city. My point is we have choices and if one choice limits access to the point that it makes it financially not viable to purchase, then change carriers.

There is no choice where I live.

Unless you consider dialup, or expensive, throttled cell-based, a choice.

I don't consider dialup to be any kind of choice at all.

Nor do I consider a cell-based connection that costs as much as a car payment, but is throttled both in speed, and gigabytes per month, to be an option.

We take what they give us, and we pay what they demand, or we have nothing...

Point is, without net neutrality, eventually the rest of you will be in the same boat.

As I said in jest earlier, I don't really care. We have been tossed to the wayside, long ago, and no one ever cared to bring any sort of competition to OUR 'market'.

But in seriousness, you guys should care. You do not want to end up like us.

BadKarma wrote:

Selador wrote:

BadKarma wrote:We have more choices. ATT, Verizon and TMO are all carriers for cellular service which you can purchase PUCKs from. We happen to have a carrier(WAVE) that is decided by the city council. Same with areas in Tacoma, Seattle etc... So, you have carriers decided by the city. My point is we have choices and if one choice limits access to the point that it makes it financially not viable to purchase, then change carriers.

There is no choice where I live.

Unless you consider dialup, or expensive, throttled cell-based, a choice.

I don't consider dialup to be any kind of choice at all.

Nor do I consider a cell-based connection that costs as much as a car payment, but is throttled both in speed, and gigabytes per month, to be an option.

We take what they give us, and we pay what they demand, or we have nothing...

Point is, without net neutrality, eventually the rest of you will be in the same boat.

As I said in jest earlier, I don't really care. We have been tossed to the wayside, long ago, and no one ever cared to bring any sort of competition to OUR 'market'.

But in seriousness, you guys should care. You do not want to end up like us.

A PUCK costs ~$60 a month and it is not throttled. It is cellular.

You can get 5GB per month for $50 or 10GB per month for $80, plus $10 per additional GB. This means you can't use the 4620L to replace your current home Internet connection, since you can easily watch 5GB worth of streaming video on Netflix in a single day.

BadKarma wrote:

Selador wrote:

BadKarma wrote:We have more choices. ATT, Verizon and TMO are all carriers for cellular service which you can purchase PUCKs from. We happen to have a carrier(WAVE) that is decided by the city council. Same with areas in Tacoma, Seattle etc... So, you have carriers decided by the city. My point is we have choices and if one choice limits access to the point that it makes it financially not viable to purchase, then change carriers.

There is no choice where I live.

Unless you consider dialup, or expensive, throttled cell-based, a choice.

I don't consider dialup to be any kind of choice at all.

Nor do I consider a cell-based connection that costs as much as a car payment, but is throttled both in speed, and gigabytes per month, to be an option.

We take what they give us, and we pay what they demand, or we have nothing...

Point is, without net neutrality, eventually the rest of you will be in the same boat.

As I said in jest earlier, I don't really care. We have been tossed to the wayside, long ago, and no one ever cared to bring any sort of competition to OUR 'market'.

But in seriousness, you guys should care. You do not want to end up like us.

A PUCK costs ~$60 a month and it is not throttled. It is cellular.

snozzberries wrote:

BadKarma wrote:

Selador wrote:

BadKarma wrote:We have more choices. ATT, Verizon and TMO are all carriers for cellular service which you can purchase PUCKs from. We happen to have a carrier(WAVE) that is decided by the city council. Same with areas in Tacoma, Seattle etc... So, you have carriers decided by the city. My point is we have choices and if one choice limits access to the point that it makes it financially not viable to purchase, then change carriers.

There is no choice where I live.

Unless you consider dialup, or expensive, throttled cell-based, a choice.

I don't consider dialup to be any kind of choice at all.

Nor do I consider a cell-based connection that costs as much as a car payment, but is throttled both in speed, and gigabytes per month, to be an option.

We take what they give us, and we pay what they demand, or we have nothing...

Point is, without net neutrality, eventually the rest of you will be in the same boat.

As I said in jest earlier, I don't really care. We have been tossed to the wayside, long ago, and no one ever cared to bring any sort of competition to OUR 'market'.

But in seriousness, you guys should care. You do not want to end up like us.

A PUCK costs ~$60 a month and it is not throttled. It is cellular.

Please provide a link to this amazing service.
https://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2402900,00.asp

You can get 5GB per month for $50 or 10GB per month for $80, plus $10 per additional GB. This means you can't use the 4620L to replace your current home Internet connection, since you can easily watch 5GB worth of streaming video on Netflix in a single day.

Cellular based internet is NOT competition for Cable/DSL/Fiber. If you think it is, then go stream 1tb of Netflix over your cellular connection and tell me how much you like your $10,000 a month bill.

BadKarma wrote:Cellular is in direct competition for areas that do not have high speed broadband service.

BadKarma wrote:LTE beats DSL and 5G will be on par with broadband.