3 ms·

> According to reviews conducted by local telecoms regulator TKK, the IP address blocking violated net neutrality regulations and will no longer be allowed. Th

> According to reviews conducted by local telecoms regulator TKK, the IP address blocking violated net neutrality regulations and will no longer be allowed. Thank god for net neutrality. We of course have that here in America right? Cus freedom!

astrange 3y ago
Yes, we do have that. It's at the state level.
msla 3y ago
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/22/technology/montana-net-neutrality.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/22/technology/montana-net-ne... https://www.multistate.us/insider/2018/1/24/montana-leads-state-action-on-net-neutrality https://www.multistate.us/insider/2018/1/24/montana-leads-st... Montana's had it since 2018, which was a first: > Montana Governor Steve Bullock (D) signed an executive order requiring internet service providers (ISPs) with state contracts to adhere to “net neutrality.” The state became the first to enact such measures in response to the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) decision to repeal net neutrality rules last December.
ars 3y ago
And despite not having net neutrality in the US not a single one of the fears came true. Which is what I said way back then: There's nothing wrong with net neutrality but it's simply not necessary.
- knodi123 3y ago
  but they could have. still could. and you might not even know. and the fact that one of our political teams has been fighting SO HARD against net neutrality is a big red flag. protections are important even if someone's not actively and noticeably abusing people right this minute.
  - ars 3y ago
    There's been exactly zero problems in 20 years (the idea was introduced in 2003), yet somehow "still could. and you might not even know.". No one is fighting "so hard" this is a dead topic. T-Mobile offers to zero rate YouTube if you let them throttle it - it's your choice. Would that be legal under Net Nutrality? Would they have to get permission from YouTube?
    - johnnyanmac 3y ago
      >No one is fighting "so hard" this is a dead topic. AI was a pretty dead topic after the 80's boom as well. Hell, we can argue VR is still a "dead" topic, but we know sometime in our (millenial+) lifetime that we're going to have major landmark cases over VR/AR tech. I'd rather patch loopholes before they get abused at this point.
    - knodi123 3y ago
      This article feels like it was written directly as a reply to you: https://www.freepress.net/blog/net-neutrality-violations-brief-history https://www.freepress.net/blog/net-neutrality-violations-bri...
- tbrownaw 3y ago
  > And despite not having net neutrality in the US not a single one of the fears came true. That same set of scoundrels[1] that CF backtracked on defending keeps having routing issues (on top of their ddos issues). Supposedly they (or someone related?) recently complained to a state AG under a state-level net neutrality rule. Not sure if it's been long enough to know if anything'll come of it. . [1] https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/52416-the-trouble-with-fighting-for-human-freedom-is-that-one https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/52416-the-trouble-with-figh...

astrange 3y ago

Yes, we do have that. It's at the state level.

msla 3y ago

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/22/technology/montana-net-neutrality.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/22/technology/montana-net-ne... https://www.multistate.us/insider/2018/1/24/montana-leads-state-action-on-net-neutrality https://www.multistate.us/insider/2018/1/24/montana-leads-st... Montana's had it since 2018, which was a first: > Montana Governor Steve Bullock (D) signed an executive order requiring internet service providers (ISPs) with state contracts to adhere to “net neutrality.” The state became the first to enact such measures in response to the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) decision to repeal net neutrality rules last December.

ars 3y ago

And despite not having net neutrality in the US not a single one of the fears came true. Which is what I said way back then: There's nothing wrong with net neutrality but it's simply not necessary.

knodi123 3y ago
but they could have. still could. and you might not even know. and the fact that one of our political teams has been fighting SO HARD against net neutrality is a big red flag. protections are important even if someone's not actively and noticeably abusing people right this minute.
- ars 3y ago
  There's been exactly zero problems in 20 years (the idea was introduced in 2003), yet somehow "still could. and you might not even know.". No one is fighting "so hard" this is a dead topic. T-Mobile offers to zero rate YouTube if you let them throttle it - it's your choice. Would that be legal under Net Nutrality? Would they have to get permission from YouTube?
  - johnnyanmac 3y ago
    >No one is fighting "so hard" this is a dead topic. AI was a pretty dead topic after the 80's boom as well. Hell, we can argue VR is still a "dead" topic, but we know sometime in our (millenial+) lifetime that we're going to have major landmark cases over VR/AR tech. I'd rather patch loopholes before they get abused at this point.
  - knodi123 3y ago
    This article feels like it was written directly as a reply to you: https://www.freepress.net/blog/net-neutrality-violations-brief-history https://www.freepress.net/blog/net-neutrality-violations-bri...
tbrownaw 3y ago
> And despite not having net neutrality in the US not a single one of the fears came true. That same set of scoundrels[1] that CF backtracked on defending keeps having routing issues (on top of their ddos issues). Supposedly they (or someone related?) recently complained to a state AG under a state-level net neutrality rule. Not sure if it's been long enough to know if anything'll come of it. . [1] https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/52416-the-trouble-with-fighting-for-human-freedom-is-that-one https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/52416-the-trouble-with-figh...