The 'net is now neutered - FCC adopts new regs today

[H2obouget]

State regulated health care.
State regulated utilities.
Revisionist history.

Naaa
There no push towards socialism.
Its all in your mind.

Behave...Big Brother is watching you.

[Massivedesign]

So, are tiered data plans from cellular carriers next?

Welcome to the question that's been in my head for a while now.. We have tiered now as far as data usage, not really tiered for priority content. Will be interesting to see how this plays out to the Cell Guys...

[TechnoWeenie]

So, are tiered data plans from cellular carriers next?

Welcome to the question that's been in my head for a while now.. We have tiered now as far as data usage, not really tiered for priority content. Will be interesting to see how this plays out to the Cell Guys...

Coming to a cell carrier near you....

$200 for unlimited data, or no data at all...

Courtesy of 'net neutrality'...

[H2obouget]

So, are tiered data plans from cellular carriers next?

Welcome to the question that's been in my head for a while now.. We have tiered now as far as data usage, not really tiered for priority content. Will be interesting to see how this plays out to the Cell Guys...

Coming to a cell carrier near you....

$200 for unlimited data, or no data at all...

Courtesy of 'net neutrality'...

That just the Fed tax...your actual bill will be higher.

[WaJim]

So, are tiered data plans from cellular carriers next?

Welcome to the question that's been in my head for a while now.. We have tiered now as far as data usage, not really tiered for priority content. Will be interesting to see how this plays out to the Cell Guys...

Coming to a cell carrier near you....

$200 for unlimited data, OR NO DATA AT ALL...

Courtesy of 'net neutrality'...

Sceptic......

Jeeze.



Want to bet its more.?

$H.C.X3 for 1/3 the coverage = $INetX3 for 1/3 the coverage.

Seems to be the going rate.

You'll be paying what your paying now for just phone and maybe text.






I've said it before.

Create the demand...make it so people cant live / operate without it.... then Bend em Over.

[snozzberries]

Are you trolling? I hope that's not actually your source for news. That's like reading a tabloid. It is factually wrong.

Fuck ya'll...

FCC Net Neutrality is a Regulatory 'Trojan Horse,' EFF Says


Funny though, how they seem to think Title II is better, yet this "win" is already showing signs of their premonition...

[N]ow we face the really hard part: making sure the FCC doesn’t abuse its authority.

For example, the new rules include a “general conduct rule” that will let the FCC take action against ISP practices that don’t count as blocking, throttling, or paid prioritization. As we said last week and last year, vague rules are a problem. The FCC wants to be, in Chairman Wheeler’s words, “a referee on the field” who can stop any ISP action that it thinks “hurts consumers, competition, or innovation.” The problem with a rule this vague is that neither ISPs nor Internet users can know in advance what kinds of practices will run afoul of the rule. Only companies with significant legal staff and expertise may be able to use the rule effectively. And a vague rule gives the FCC an awful lot of discretion, potentially giving an unfair advantage to parties with insider influence. That means our work is not yet done. We must stay vigilant, and call out FCC overreach.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/02/f ... ty-big-win

I agree that we need to ensure the FCC doesn't abuse its authority. Hopefully the 8 pages say "Private business's can't fuck up the internet, and neither can the FCC or the government."

If some people try to use this to block porn on the internet and implement decency laws, all hell will break loose. As in, the next American Revolution.

[edogg]

I agree that we need to ensure the FCC doesn't abuse its authority. Hopefully the 8 pages say "Private business's can't fuck up the internet, and neither can the FCC or the government."
.

If you think the gov't would include a restriction on their own power, I have some oceanfront property in AZ to sell you...

[snozzberries]

I agree that we need to ensure the FCC doesn't abuse its authority. Hopefully the 8 pages say "Private business's can't fuck up the internet, and neither can the FCC or the government."
.

If you think the gov't would include a restriction on their own power, I have some oceanfront property in AZ to sell you...

It's the basis of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. I hate to quote Wikipedia but it's convenient:

After enumerating specific rights retained by the people in the first eight Amendments, the Ninth Amendment and the Tenth Amendment summarily spelled out the principle of limited government. Together, these two last Amendments clarify the differences between the un-enumerated (as well as enumerated) rights of the people versus the expressly codified delegated powers of the federal government. The Ninth Amendment codified of the people do not have powers are expressly delegated to the federal government specifically by the Constitution. Government can do some things and not others.

The Constitution limits the power of the government in several ways. It prohibits the government from directly interfering with certain key areas: conscience, expression and association. Other actions are forbidden to the federal government and are reserved to state or local governments.

If only we could return to the constitution and get rid of the crap that is currently in the government.

[Guns4Liberty]

If you think the gov't would include a restriction on their own power, I have some oceanfront property in AZ to sell you...

It's the basis of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.<snip>

Serious question: On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being perfect and 1 being terrible, how would you rate the government's track record of adhering to the limitations placed on its power by the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution? How about for the Second Amendment, specifically? If the score you give for either question is less than 10, then I would strongly caution you to give the government the benefit of the doubt when it comes to net neutrality regulations, or whatever the topic du jour is.

[rayjax82]

The EFF says basically the same thing I've been saying and yet my tinfoil is too tight and I need to go lick comcast's boots.


For fucks sake.

[kf7mjf]

The EFF says basically the same thing I've been saying and yet my tinfoil is too tight and I need to go lick comcast's boots.


For fucks sake.

But Ted Cruz, Rush Limbaugh and Fox didn't say it.

[solyanik]

The EFF says basically the same thing I've been saying and yet my tinfoil is too tight and I need to go lick comcast's boots.


For fucks sake.

But Ted Cruz, Rush Limbaugh and Fox didn't say it.

Bingo!

There's a group of people who cannot be persuaded with "data" (sic), "facts", or "logic". The only sane thing to do is to just ignore them.

Eine neue wissenschaftliche Wahrheit pflegt sich nicht in der Weise durchzusetzen, daß ihre Gegner überzeugt werden und sich als belehrt erklären, sondern vielmehr dadurch, daß ihre Gegner allmählich aussterben und daß die heranwachsende Generation von vornherein mit der Wahrheit vertraut gemacht ist.

-- Max Planck

Since Faux "News" audience's median age is 68... well...

[snozzberries]

If you think the gov't would include a restriction on their own power, I have some oceanfront property in AZ to sell you...

It's the basis of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.<snip>

Serious question: On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being perfect and 1 being terrible, how would you rate the government's track record of adhering to the limitations placed on its power by the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution? How about for the Second Amendment, specifically? If the score you give for either question is less than 10, then I would strongly caution you to give the government the benefit of the doubt when it comes to net neutrality regulations, or whatever the topic du jour is.

Oh I agree with you. I see the governments job to stop a business from doing monopolistic terrible shit. If the company won't stop doing it, then the only way to force them is with legislation. There literally was no other option.

I'm still waiting to see the 8 pages, and still waiting to see what the Republicans that are in control of the House and the Senate write up on their own. Hopefully they will write something up that's better than Title 2.

[snozzberries]

Oh, if there was actually competition for internet access, none of this would be necessary because market forces would be the leverage to force business's to act properly.

[sc00by71]

It means that Comcast can't charge Netflix extra money to get a "fast lane". Nor can they slow the internet speeds for everyone else and charge you a premium to get into the "fast lane"

I just went to speedtest.net and came up with: 59.36 Mbps

I remember only paying for 20 Mbps through Comcrap.

Is this already in effect???

Mine doubled as well
12 ms ping
124.41 Down
11.41 Up

Wish I had this fast a connection when I used to play Quake or Unreal Tournament

There are arguments for and against net neutrality I can see both sides but keeping Comcast from having free reign on what they charge seems like a good idea.