7 ms·
The whole thing is a bit sad. We could have a real discussion about net neutrality. We could talk about how 5G probably will need different kinds of connections
by olodus 7y ago
The whole thing is a bit sad. We could have a real discussion about net neutrality. We could talk about how 5G probably will need different kinds of connections with different latency or reliability and that if you are building a normal Web service you probably don't need all that while some other services obviously do. And such specific improvement maybe should cost a bit more.
But no. Because all ISPs will use non net neutrality for is to push more expensive subs on people without really offering something better to them. Or push out competition of their own services.
Who in general would support Ait the way he behaves? He is so obviously a corporate ISP spokesperson, even without looking at his resume.
- wlesieutre 7y agoLooking at resumes, you would've thought Wheeler would be an awful FCC chairman, but he turned out ok. Which makes Pai even more frustrating because you look at him and think "I know he has ties to the industry, but he could choose do his job if he wanted to." >The FCC's mission, specified in Section One of the Communications Act of 1934 and amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (amendment to 47 U.S.C. §151) is to "make available so far as possible, to all the people of the United States, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex, rapid, efficient, Nationwide, and world-wide wire and radio communication services with adequate facilities at reasonable charges." Imagine having that mandate and going out of your way to take the position that you don't have any authority over internet connections.
- kevin_b_er 7y agoThat mission takes 2nd place to political party loyalty. The FCC runs against its own mission right down party lines.
- shmerl 7y agoPai is too corrupt to do the proper job. He only serves his ISP masters. Wheeler was doing the right thing for a change.
- pitaj 7y agoI'm still anti-NN because I hate how disingenuous and alarmist the pro-NN crowd has been. I don't think adding more regulation will fix anything. But at least now we'll get to witness the power of federalism with regulatory comparisons between states. Reasons: - general opposition to regulation, because compliance costs burden smaller firms more, raising the barrier to entry - does not address the root problem, lack of competition - reduces choices for consumers Lack of competition is caused by onerous local regulations which incumbents use to raise the barrier to entry. See: Google Fiber Because NN does not address the root cause, and in fact the support for NN has not resulted in any significant support for addressing the root cause, it can only serve to further enforce the status quo or makes things worse. Some examples of failed predictions / misleading statements made by NN supporters: - Most Americans have less than 3 ISPs. This may be true depending on how you restrict which ISPs you're referring to. Mobile carriers cover almost the whole US, so there's 3 or 4 right there. - ISPs will produce different packages for internet access. This hasn't happened. - Speeds will reduce. This hasn't happened.
- smolder 7y agoBeing upset by "alarmism" when you haven't learned the facts and why it's worth being alarmed about is a disturbing trend.
- gardnr 7y agoThat is a vacuous and irrational accusation that you have butted with weasle words. Are you attacking OP or "the world"? What are you basing your assumption on that she hasn't learned the facts?
- behringer 7y agoI don't know what parent meant but I would personally say that fits OP to a T. All of OPs claims of "this hasn't happened yet" have happened outside of the US where there is no NN.
- marmada 7y agoPlease add evidence to the comment. A lot of your statements are vague rhetoric that could be flipped in the other direction.