Net Neutrality

[stfoskey15]

The key will be ensuring that existing anti-trust and anti anti-competition laws are enforced, preventing these providers from degrading the service of any given provider in favor of their own or their bottom line.

Exactly. I'm concerned that they won't be.

[carpedm9587]

Exactly. I'm concerned that they won't be.

A fair concern. But if this is true - why were you sure that FCC rules WERE going to be enforced?

[Mountain Man]

Exactly. Obama's "net neutrality" initiative didn't add anything meaningful to the way things are done, and repealing it doesn't actually take anything away other than government bloat and unnecessary expenses.

[carpedm9587]

Exactly. Obama's "net neutrality" initiative didn't add anything meaningful to the way things are done, and repealing it doesn't actually take anything away other than government bloat and unnecessary expenses.

Can I ask a favor? Could you not agree with me so much? It's making me itch...

[Mountain Man]

The problem is not that we agree, the problem is that you're actually right about something which I imagine is a novel experience for you.

[carpedm9587]

The problem is not that we agree, the problem is that you're actually right about something which I imagine is a novel experience for you.

[Mountain Man]

And now it looks like our agreement killed the thread.

[carpedm9587]

And now it looks like our agreement killed the thread.

Such is life...

[Zero Tolerance]

Less pr0n consumption due to throttled internet speeds and data caps will be one good thing to come from this.

[Sparko]

from what I understand there has never been anything to stop the ISPs from prioritizing packets by type (VOIP/Video vs casual browsing) just from prioritizing by actual service (Netflix, Hulu, etc) and charging those companies for access. The ISPs can still give video a high speed lane, but not differentiate and charge more for Netflix or such. Net neutrality kept the ISPs from gouging their customers or the various services for extra money for specific sites.

[carpedm9587]

from what I understand there has never been anything to stop the ISPs from prioritizing packets by type (VOIP/Video vs casual browsing) just from prioritizing by actual service (Netflix, Hulu, etc) and charging those companies for access. The ISPs can still give video a high speed lane, but not differentiate and charge more for Netflix or such. Net neutrality kept the ISPs from gouging their customers or the various services for extra money for specific sites.

Actually - under the former net neutrality rules, the ISPs are permitted to prioritize packets when they are used to support different services (e.g., the carrier's voice services and Internet services often run over the same "pipe" at the edge of their network, and the latter can be prioritized). However, within the stream of traffic that is defined as Internet-specific (i.e., can cross peering links into other ISP networks), differentiation by protocol, application, or end-point is not permitted. The only exception is the management traffic required to keep the network operational, which can be prioritized.

Wikipedia is not usually a primary source - but it has a good article on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_ne...ted_principles

[Sparko]

OK so I am curious.

Everyone was predicting that all of the ISPs would go insane with power after Net Neutrality ended. Are there any reports of people being charged differently or services being throttled. Or is it too early to tell?

[carpedm9587]

OK so I am curious.

Everyone was predicting that all of the ISPs would go insane with power after Net Neutrality ended. Are there any reports of people being charged differently or services being throttled. Or is it too early to tell?

Too early to tell. Litigation has just started, and I suspect most ISPs would probably be loathe to start changing prices before all that dust settles, for fear of giving the litigators ammunition for their argument.