 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Internet Neutrality is at stake
|
|
|
|||||||
|
BS: Internet Neutrality is at stake |
Share Thread
|
||||||
|
Subject: Internet Neutrality is at stake From: gnu Date: 22 Nov 17 - 04:58 PM https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/ending-net-neutrality-will-destroy-everything-makes-internet-great-ncna823301 Max has commented on this : "These ****ers are going to ruin the Internet." Yes, they are. It's time for everyone to get after their politicians. |
|
Subject: BS: Internet Neutrality is at stake From: gnu Date: 22 Nov 17 - 05:02 PM Yes... two threads. One above and one below the line. Max has commented : "These ****ers are going to ruin the Internet." https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/ending-net-neutrality-will-destroy-everything-makes-internet-great-ncna823301 Time to put pressure on your politicians. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Internet Neutrality is at stake From: Stilly River Sage Date: 22 Nov 17 - 05:10 PM It looks like the Man from Verizon wants to push this through when he thinks no one is looking. |
|
Subject: RE: Internet Neutrality is at stake From: Stilly River Sage Date: 22 Nov 17 - 05:25 PM Donate to Fight for the Future is a grassroots way to register your views. And they take modest donations to help with their work. There are tweets out there with information, such as Catherine Google it. Look at Facebook and Twitter. Or ignore the issue and stream your NetFlix - until you have to pay extra to do any of those things, anyway. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Internet Neutrality is at stake From: Joe Offer Date: 22 Nov 17 - 05:46 PM I agree with your sentiments and your passion, gnu, but two threads is just too darn confusing. And it doesn't have much to do with music, so I moved it all below the line. There's been a longstanding principle at Mudcat that there should be only one active thread on any given subject. Otherwise, our brains turn to mush. Sorry. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Internet Neutrality is at stake From: Greg F. Date: 22 Nov 17 - 06:03 PM So what's the problem? Just one more way that tRUMP is Making AmeriKKKa Great Again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Internet Neutrality is at stake From: Joe Offer Date: 22 Nov 17 - 10:39 PM It's interesting that the Trump Administration classes the removal of Internet Neutrality as "deregulation." Seems to me, that removal of Internet Neutrality allows Internet providers to regulate and control all who use the Internet. Internet Neutrality allows us users to be free from corporate control. I can't see how the removal of Internet Neutrality helps anyone other than the Internet providers who enjoy a near-monopoly. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Internet Neutrality is at stake From: Donuel Date: 22 Nov 17 - 11:28 PM Joe, that's true but Mudcat really is threatened this time. Agree to be extorted for $ or go back to dial up delays Its only 2 weeks away until the Trump FCC votes to essentially weed out the non affluent web sites at reasonable speed. Most likely Mudcat can't afford what face book pays to ride an 8 lane highway while Mudcat will get pushed into a narrow street. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Internet Neutrality is at stake From: Joe Offer Date: 23 Nov 17 - 01:59 AM Can't say I have much concern about Mudcat, because Mudcat is mostly text and requires very little bandwidth. Am I wrong? -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Internet Neutrality is at stake From: Mr Red Date: 23 Nov 17 - 03:13 AM Internet providers have been doing this for a long time. On the UK's biggest - BT - their service is attrocious in rural areas and if you are at the end of the line (literally) it is not the speed limit that dictates the service (~=3 Mb) it is the traffic. And for all the world it looks like they are happy to give priority to those that paid for an upgrade to higher speeds. The problem is there is a disconnect in the policy because my GF can't get an upgrade because of the location. But she still suffers interruptions and as more people use it for TV any live (BT monopoly content) has been getting worse and worse. The millions of BT (notso) HotSpots they tout as a sales incentive are in the same boat. I can get a WiFi connection at 144Mb but the content could be zero for hours. The guy who has the router gets priority. And notably the outage is around 3:30pm when schoolkids are home. They would argue the HotSpot was free, but in UK law anything free with is part of the cost. Not that they care. And as a digression - news, adverts and prices are predicated on your browsing history/location. Notably E-Bay searches don't seem to influence the ads except on E-Bay. Obviously Goggle don't get those data. Amazin' does share data IME. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Internet Neutrality is at stake From: DaveRo Date: 23 Nov 17 - 03:45 AM Joe Offer wrote: Can't say I have much concern about Mudcat, because Mudcat is mostly text and requires very little bandwidth.The concern might be about availability, rather than speed. An ISP might do a deal with Facebook, Netflix, and select others, and put 'the rest of the web' (RoW) in a separate paid-for bundle. Some people would be happy with just Facebook - who needs the RoW? Governments increasingly require ISPs to regulate content - block porn, archive everything for the security services - which is expensive. The RoW becomes increasingly expensive to provide and a legal liability. So it becomes a premium bundle - and fewer people take it. Banks, shops, government services, move off the web into Facebook, or only use apps which they pay ISPs to let though. Much cheaper for ISPs to not offer the RoW at all and subcontract all those requirenents and liabilities to Facebook etc. We saw it in the UK with usenet. It was part if the internet so ISPs provided it. Then they decided that the internet meant the web and dropped it. It could happen with the RoW - the free and open part of the web. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Internet Neutrality is at stake From: Greg F. Date: 23 Nov 17 - 09:51 AM It's interesting that the Trump Administration classes the removal of Internet Neutrality as "deregulation." Its not interesting, its a lie. Again. |
