FA+
Shop
Net Neutrality, explained and simplified.
8 years ago
General
Net Neutrality, explained and simplified.
"Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers should enable access to all content and applications regardless of the source, and without favoring or blocking particular products or websites. That is all it protects. If you want to fight for busting up the monopolies and expanding rural access and speed, look elsewhere, because its not net neutrality’s problem."
Basically "Cable TV Companies" that own most the telecommunication infrastructure don't like the idea of an open and ad free internet for one price and EQUAL bandwidth, and want to apply the outdated cable company logic of buying separate "packages and tiers" so they can make more money than they already do.
The funny thing is, when cable TV companies first came out, the whole point was to pay for TV that did NOT have commercials, but then at some point they snuck them in and people ended up paying for commercials too... So they want to do the same with the internet, and control ALL the content you can access.
Also, America has a bunch of what we call "Local Monopolies" that aren't covered under federal anti-trust laws. So many people do not have a "CHOICE" when it comes to picking an internet service provider as companies like Time Warner, Verizon, or AT&T will "own" entire cities and area-codes internet infrastructure and be "the only choice or nothing" in certain areas.
So...
NOW with net neutrality:
ALL the uncensored internet is included EQUALLY in the price you pay for internet service, save for any particular site that requires a separate subscription.
The government is only involved in that it makes sure the internet is treated just like phones, AM/FM radios, and broadcast "free" TV, where no one thing can be treated better or worse than another.
THEN without net neutrality:
The government is out of the internet equality business and corporations take over everything completely.
The entire internet is broken up into tiers, subscriptions, packages, bandwidth speed-limits, and "fast lanes".
You want social media? That'll be $35 a month.
You want porn? That'll be $55 a month.
You want streaming TV services like Netflix? That'll be an extra $20 a month.
You want to do online shopping at Walmart or Amazon? That'll be an extra $25 a month.
You do a lot of video uploads? You need the "fast lane upload and download package" for faster internet speeds, only $95 a month!
And you get lots and lots of CENSORSHIP too! Sorry you cannot go to any website that a company deems "offensive" or "questionable" anymore, especially their competitors!
"Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers should enable access to all content and applications regardless of the source, and without favoring or blocking particular products or websites. That is all it protects. If you want to fight for busting up the monopolies and expanding rural access and speed, look elsewhere, because its not net neutrality’s problem."
Basically "Cable TV Companies" that own most the telecommunication infrastructure don't like the idea of an open and ad free internet for one price and EQUAL bandwidth, and want to apply the outdated cable company logic of buying separate "packages and tiers" so they can make more money than they already do.
The funny thing is, when cable TV companies first came out, the whole point was to pay for TV that did NOT have commercials, but then at some point they snuck them in and people ended up paying for commercials too... So they want to do the same with the internet, and control ALL the content you can access.
Also, America has a bunch of what we call "Local Monopolies" that aren't covered under federal anti-trust laws. So many people do not have a "CHOICE" when it comes to picking an internet service provider as companies like Time Warner, Verizon, or AT&T will "own" entire cities and area-codes internet infrastructure and be "the only choice or nothing" in certain areas.
So...
NOW with net neutrality:
ALL the uncensored internet is included EQUALLY in the price you pay for internet service, save for any particular site that requires a separate subscription.
The government is only involved in that it makes sure the internet is treated just like phones, AM/FM radios, and broadcast "free" TV, where no one thing can be treated better or worse than another.
THEN without net neutrality:
The government is out of the internet equality business and corporations take over everything completely.
The entire internet is broken up into tiers, subscriptions, packages, bandwidth speed-limits, and "fast lanes".
You want social media? That'll be $35 a month.
You want porn? That'll be $55 a month.
You want streaming TV services like Netflix? That'll be an extra $20 a month.
You want to do online shopping at Walmart or Amazon? That'll be an extra $25 a month.
You do a lot of video uploads? You need the "fast lane upload and download package" for faster internet speeds, only $95 a month!
And you get lots and lots of CENSORSHIP too! Sorry you cannot go to any website that a company deems "offensive" or "questionable" anymore, especially their competitors!
So if this fucker passes...it'll be one of my childhood fears come to fruition.
Hell, it's one of the reasons I got rid of cable TV, I was tired of paying a shit ton of money to be advertised to.
And these companies are shitting themselves as people FLEE cable TV for online streaming services at a lower price and they want to do all they can to either stop that or make it more expensive.
Net neutrality has NOTHING to do with these local monopolies, that's the actual free-market at work. When they can buy or lease the public land their towers and transmission lines go though, and that gives them the ability to block other companies from setting up in many areas.
Government prohibits you by law from competing with their pet telcos. They put a stop to Google Fibre because it would make most ISPs irrelevant and unneeded. The whole reason you have only the choice of a couple, or even less ISPs is directly the fault of government and their telco lobbyists. So giving control of the internet into the hands of the same government that screwed up internet access, and gets all sorts of money from the likes of comcast or time warner, is an insanely idiotic idea. Do you want to know what that does? Look no further than the clean air act. It was a bill proposed that would supposedly squeeze the balls of the big corporate factories to get them to stop poisoning the air. But then it turns out the factories lobbied, and got a grandfather clause put in for the biggest factories, not requiring them to comply with the law at all, but crushing any smaller business that happened to produce pollution. If corporations have politicians in their pockets, the last thing you want to do is give the politicians more power.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8j95dVw6Kbc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_Cu2U6g46o
I believe you may be thinking more of anti-trust, patent, and infrastructure laws allowing companies the local monopolies I mentioned earlier.
Comcast, Verizon and AT&T have actually been lobbying congress to help net neutrality be written in a way that they benefit. Be it permanent grandfather clauses, or other things: https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/12/.....-day-of-action
The government has always taken action against the people in favor of their big cronies. What makes you think that will be different with net neutrality? The last thing you want is the FCC getting it's bloated, grubby hands all over the internet.
Also, none of those things happened before net neutrality.
The main flaw in those arguments is they are all based in the idea corporations have an interest in boycotting their own money-making structures for some mysterious reason.
Why would an Internet provider service have any interest in making the Internet slower or harder to use, or slap arbitrary price tags on certain services which would drive away customers and encourage piracy, when they are making billions the way it works now? It makes absolutely no sense.
They already charge for tiers of bandwidth, what makes you think they wouldn't do the same for content?
Companies may shoot themselves in the foot all the time, or price gouge, and many people will still pay because it may be the only choice other than not having it.
Hell, many companies are selling one incomplete thing, then charging extra to get the "complete" thing. Example: Video-game companies like EA and such with day-one-DLC and micro-transactions and pay-2-win schemes. If a company can find a way to charge more for something that used to be INCLUDED in the base price, they will.
Oh and for the "this didn't happen before" part:
2005 – North Carolina ISP Madison River Communications blocked VoIP service Vonage.
2005 – Comcast blocked or severely delayed traffic using the BitTorrent file-sharing protocol. (The company even had the guts to deny this for months until evidence was presented by the Associated Press.)
2007 – AT&T censored Pearl Jam because lead singer criticized President Bush.
2007 to 2009 – AT&T forced Apple to block Skype because it didn’t like the competition. At the time, the carrier had exclusive rights to sell the iPhone and even then the net neutrality advocates were pushing the government to protect online consumers, over 5 years before these rules were actually passed.
2009 – Google Voice app faced similar issues from ISPs, including AT&T on iPhone.
2010 – Windstream Communications, a DSL provider, started hijacking search results made using Google toolbar. It consistently redirected users to Windstream’s own search engine and results.
2011 – MetroPCS, one of the top-five wireless carriers at the time, announced plans to block streaming services over its 4G network from everyone except YouTube.
2011 to 2013 – AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon blocked Google Wallet in favor of Isis, a mobile payment system in which all three had shares. Verizon even asked Google to not include its payment app in its Nexus devices.
2012 – AT&T blocked FaceTime; again because the company didn’t like the competition.
2012 – Verizon started blocking people from using tethering apps on their phones that enabled consumers to avoid the company’s $20 tethering fee.
2014 – AT&T announced a new “sponsored data” scheme, offering content creators a way to buy their way around the data caps that AT&T imposes on its subscribers.
2014 – Netflix started paying Verizon and Comcast to “improve streaming service for consumers.”
2014 – T-Mobile was accused of using data caps to manipulate online competition.
I never said anything about "free" internet. lol
It already costs money to have internet. Without net neutrality, these companies can prioritize and censor whatever they want and charge extra for "popular" services.
You pay for phone service, it would be like having an extra charge to use 911, or an extra monthly fee to order pizza over the phone.
No more furry web sites for you, they are considered bestiality by all the service providers in your area.
You also cannot shop on Amazon any more because Walmart owns a bigger share of the telecom companies in your area.