Net Neutrality is REALLY dead

[wraith808]

The Government Just Turned the Internet Into the Equivalent of First Class and Coach

It's official: The FCC is moving ahead with their plan to replace its discarded open Internet rules with new ones that will allow Internet companies to pay for fast lanes, voting 3-2 in favor of the ISP-favored plan.

Here's how it works: Under the FCC's new rules, companies that deliver content over the Internet like Netflix, Amazon Instant, YouTube, and even PolicyMic could now pay ISPs for direct access to their customers. Those who don't pay will be treated like all other data, even if they need to relay high-capacity things like streaming video or cloud storage. That means paying companies' content will arrive much faster than content from other Internet companies, who will be stuck in a de facto slow lane. The end result is that companies that can't afford to pay for special treatment will reach fewer people and be at a competitive disadvantage in the marketplace.

Detractors of the new proposal fear that ISPs will simply charge escalating fees for direct access and continue to stall upgrading their outdated communications infrastructure, meaning slow lanes will end up even further behind the fast lanes. Further opposition to such agreements stems from the widespread perception that rich, established companies will be able to wall off the market, preventing competitors that would need to send large amounts of data from entering the market.

Arstechnica reports that two protesters were led out of the meeting after disrupting proceedings. Mass protests both outside the commission's offices and online coincided with the vote.

(more at link)

[mouser]

It may shock some to hear that I'm not opposed to the abstract *concept* of having super-heavy bandwidth services (like netflix) pay more.  But I completely agree that the likely end result of this is that small organizations get shafted and big corporations can once again buy their way to dominance.  And the ISPs get more and more powerful and rich and entrenched.

Detractors of the new proposal fear that ISPs will simply charge escalating fees for direct access and continue to stall upgrading their outdated communications infrastructure,  meaning slow lanes will end up even further behind the fast lanes

This is why I think that a compromise proposal should have been something like allowing ISPs to charge more for heavy high-speed bandwidth, but at the same time require that the SLOWEST speed for normal priced access was no slower than 50% of the high speed.  That way the high speed folks would be subsidizing the rest.

Having said that, and at the risk of injecting politics, my personal preference would be to wipe the for profit internet service provider corporations off the face of the earth (along with the for-profit health care and health insurance corporations, but thats a topic for the basement) and nationalize the internet.

[40hz]

ISPs are the new railroad barons.

Every time a new frontier gets opened up, the first people in (after the all the dead pioneers get buried) are the self-nominated "gatekeepers" and "developers" - aided and abetted by a clueless and jealous government which feels anything "new" it can't find a major role for itself in (and doesn't understand) needs to be handed over to "responsible and trusted business parters" in order to control it - since the government itself has no real legal authority to do so.

The Internet is too empowering to be allowed to continue in its present form. The Occupy Movement, the Snowden revelations, Wikileaks, and the Arab Spring were good examples of what can happen when the general public gets its hands on too good and unstoppable a communications system. Governments worldwide are terrified.

They should be. Accountability is a bitch.

[rgdot]

It may shock some to hear that I'm not opposed to the abstract *concept* of having super-heavy bandwidth services (like netflix) pay more.  But I completely agree that the likely end result of this is that small organizations get shafted and big corporations can once again buy their way to dominance.  And the ISPs get more and more powerful and rich and entrenched.

Detractors of the new proposal fear that ISPs will simply charge escalating fees for direct access and continue to stall upgrading their outdated communications infrastructure,  meaning slow lanes will end up even further behind the fast lanes

This is why I think that a compromise proposal should have been something like allowing ISPs to charge more for heavy high-speed bandwidth, but at the same time require that the SLOWEST speed for normal priced access was no slower than 50% of the high speed.  That way the high speed folks would be subsidizing the rest.

Having said that, and at the risk of injecting politics, my personal preference would be to wipe the for profit internet service provider corporations off the face of the earth (along with the for-profit health care and health insurance corporations, but thats a topic for the basement) and nationalize the internet.

-mouser (May 16, 2014, 01:14 PM)

I am in therapy (not really but close enough) to not talk politics online. This is mostly failing when it comes to twitter for example. Having said all that ... nationalize the internet?? And people call me a commie 


Feel free to delete this pointless post after it is read