3 ms·

The sky was supposed to fall if net neutrality were abrogated, and IME, that hasn't happened. ISPs aren't run by complete idiots. They knew this current switch

The sky was supposed to fall if net neutrality were abrogated, and IME, that hasn't happened. ISPs aren't run by complete idiots. They knew this current switch back was a likely possibility. If they had rushed to implement service tiers, it would have given even more ammunition to the net neutrality debate. Now they can say "See we had a chance for a few years to do it and didn't, so we need to pass laws to make sure net neutrality is illegal to protect our freedom." They'll pay some politicians to push something like the "Internet Freedom Act" and then they'll be good to go.

somenameforme 3y ago
And how long do you expect your timeline to playout on? It's been more than 6 years now, and we're talking about corporations that regularly have difficulty seeing beyond next quarter, and have absolutely no qualms pissing off the entire world if it means another buck. Why wouldn't they have rushed to enact the new laws immediately under an FCC political establishment that would have been favorable to such? It seems to me that simple market economics offers a compelling alternative. The more they screw the customer, the more room there is for new or existing competitor, be that something like Starlink or one of the many micro-ISPs being able to grow a bit. You need to create some economic model where these tiers are both profitable and don't expose you to a reasonable fear of competition. That seems quite difficult to do.
- supriyo-biswas 3y ago
  There is precedent of this happening in countries without Net Neutrality laws such as the Philippines, where ISPs have zero-rating agreements with operators of popular websites, which effectively cements the position of incumbents.
- s3p 3y ago
  This is just not true. There is no competition. Cities have Comcast or Spectrum; they don't have both. #3 and #4 in Wireless just merged. It is literally T-mobile, Verizon, or AT&T. Where would the consumers go to? They all do the exact same thing. And once one competitor makes the switch, they all will, since they all make more money. This literally happened when T-mobile sold streaming as an addon package [0] or when AT&T zero rated DirecTV on their wireless plans. The only reason the internet hasn't gotten significantly worse is because we DID have net neutrality for a while, and they knew it would come back once Democrats had a majority on the FCC. [0] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/01/eff-confirms-t-mobiles-bingeon-optimization-just-throttling-applies https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/01/eff-confirms-t-mobiles...
  - KerrAvon 3y ago
    It's not gotten worse strictly because California passed a very strong net neutrality law and the telcos were hoping the legal system would kill that so they could do whatever they pleased. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Internet_Consumer_Protection_and_Net_Neutrality_Act_of_2018 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Internet_Consumer_P... Not working out for them so far: > Ninth Circuit ruled unanimously in January 2022 that California's net neutrality law may continue to be enforced and cannot be overridden by the FCC as, current as of the decision, Internet services were classified as information services

somenameforme 3y ago

And how long do you expect your timeline to playout on? It's been more than 6 years now, and we're talking about corporations that regularly have difficulty seeing beyond next quarter, and have absolutely no qualms pissing off the entire world if it means another buck. Why wouldn't they have rushed to enact the new laws immediately under an FCC political establishment that would have been favorable to such? It seems to me that simple market economics offers a compelling alternative. The more they screw the customer, the more room there is for new or existing competitor, be that something like Starlink or one of the many micro-ISPs being able to grow a bit. You need to create some economic model where these tiers are both profitable and don't expose you to a reasonable fear of competition. That seems quite difficult to do.

supriyo-biswas 3y ago
There is precedent of this happening in countries without Net Neutrality laws such as the Philippines, where ISPs have zero-rating agreements with operators of popular websites, which effectively cements the position of incumbents.
s3p 3y ago
This is just not true. There is no competition. Cities have Comcast or Spectrum; they don't have both. #3 and #4 in Wireless just merged. It is literally T-mobile, Verizon, or AT&T. Where would the consumers go to? They all do the exact same thing. And once one competitor makes the switch, they all will, since they all make more money. This literally happened when T-mobile sold streaming as an addon package [0] or when AT&T zero rated DirecTV on their wireless plans. The only reason the internet hasn't gotten significantly worse is because we DID have net neutrality for a while, and they knew it would come back once Democrats had a majority on the FCC. [0] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/01/eff-confirms-t-mobiles-bingeon-optimization-just-throttling-applies https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/01/eff-confirms-t-mobiles...
- KerrAvon 3y ago
  It's not gotten worse strictly because California passed a very strong net neutrality law and the telcos were hoping the legal system would kill that so they could do whatever they pleased. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Internet_Consumer_Protection_and_Net_Neutrality_Act_of_2018 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Internet_Consumer_P... Not working out for them so far: > Ninth Circuit ruled unanimously in January 2022 that California's net neutrality law may continue to be enforced and cannot be overridden by the FCC as, current as of the decision, Internet services were classified as information services