4 ms·

Have you noticed any negative impacts from not having net neutrality? I haven't -- compare this to FOSTA-SESTA, which knocked craigslist personals and various o

by dilap 3y ago

Have you noticed any negative impacts from not having net neutrality? I haven't -- compare this to FOSTA-SESTA, which knocked craigslist personals and various other sites offline. I don't really see why people get so worked up about net neutrality.

SkyPuncher 3y ago
Yes, I have. Some Mobile internet providers seduce stream quality unless you pay more. Despite advertising speeds and capacity, they still limit you.
unclebucknasty 3y ago
>I don't really see why people get so worked up about net neutrality. At the time, there were still remnants of the early ideas about the Internet being a democratizing force. For instance, that it would be possible for anyone to stand up a service and have an equal chance of competing.
bisby 3y ago
Multiple major ISPs used to throttle Netflix, so that customers would have a poor experience and switch to the ISP owned streaming service. That stopped the last time net neutrality came up (that was basically WHY it came up). Right now, if there are no immediately visible negative impacts, it's because ISPs are being cautious to not get regulated, not because they won't do it again. If companies are doing nothing wrong and are just doing exactly what we want anyway, they would have no issues supporting net neutrality: "That's what we're already doing, it's a good thing!" The fact that they are so adamantly against "don't throttle your competitors traffic" is a huge red flag screaming "thats exactly what they are trying to do". So I have seen negative impacts from not having net neutrality in the past (netflix throttling), yes.
- dilap 3y ago
  Thanks, this makes sense.
wmf 3y ago
ISPs have been on relatively good behavior because they know that being evil will motivate net neutrality to be reinstated. Peering extortion is probably distorting competition between streaming companies but it's designed so that consumers don't see it.
perrylaj 3y ago
There are plenty of examples of real damage caused by ISPs being able to give preferential treatment to what _they_ think is important. A quick search comes up with plenty of examples: 1. ISPs limiting 3rd party VOIP solutions to avoid competition with their own VOIP solutions 2. Comcast blocking bitorrent communication was pretty obvious case of ISP preferentially limiting traffic 3. Verizon blocking text messages it didn't like the political message of 4. Verizon blocking 3rd party tethering apps, limiting users from using the bandwidth they pay for because they want to prevent competition 5. ATT prevented Facetime over their network unless users paid a higher subscription, even though users were already paying for data 6. Verizon limiting bandwidth for arbitrary reasons during natural disasters (first responders communication hampered due to limits justified through 'we don't need to follow net neutrality anymore') Those are a few, there are MANY more examples in the US alone. Ya, some or many have been rolled back due to public outcry, but they shouldn't have happened to begin with. Allowing ISPs to determine which traffic is allowed based on their own self interest is just a terrible idea. Just because you haven't been harmed by it yet doesn't mean much, especially not in a country where the majority have only one or maybe two broadband ISPs to choose from. It WILL be abused, and we know this because it already has. ISPs should be dumb pipes and not much more.
- nostromo 3y ago
  Do you have any examples post 2020, when net neutrality was revoked? The internet has changed dramatically in the 10+ years since most of your examples and removal of net neutrality regulation has not seemed to cause any of those issues to resurface.
  - quickslowdown 3y ago
    Do you work for an ISP or something? I've seen almost this exact comment from you sprinkled all over this thread...
  - Cody-99 3y ago
    Twitch left Korea because of their crazy fees that would be prohibited under net neutrality. ISPs double dip and charge websites/companies like twitch, Youtube, etc to deliver data and also charge their users money at the same time. https://restofworld.org/2024/south-korea-twitch-exit-problems-stream/ https://restofworld.org/2024/south-korea-twitch-exit-problem... >The problem stems from a “sender pays” rule instituted by South Korea’s Ministry of Science and ICT in 2016, to address the growing interconnection demands of video streaming and other bandwidth-intensive services. The rule requires companies to compensate the receiving networks for the traffic they send. It’s meant to tax heavy senders like Netflix and YouTube. Livestreaming sites like Twitch face particularly steep fees, as low latency is critical for live content. >The “sender pays” model has been widely criticized by net neutrality advocates: In a recent statement calling for the repeal of the rule in the wake of Twitch’s exit, Open Net Korea warned that it “devastates the domestic content ecosystem” and “fragments the internet.” One doesn't need an example from just a few months ago to see why this is a bad idea. Acting like the internet is so different today than 5/10 years ago so you can try to dismiss good examples is silly and acting in bad faith.
Cody-99 3y ago
In the US the obvious on is mobile providers throttling video streaming and other high bandwidth services. Globally there are other negative examples. IIRC twitch pulled out of Korea recently because they didn't want to pay ISPs to deliver their content (for which ISPs users also pay).

by dilap 3y ago

SkyPuncher 3y ago

Yes, I have. Some Mobile internet providers seduce stream quality unless you pay more. Despite advertising speeds and capacity, they still limit you.

unclebucknasty 3y ago

>I don't really see why people get so worked up about net neutrality. At the time, there were still remnants of the early ideas about the Internet being a democratizing force. For instance, that it would be possible for anyone to stand up a service and have an equal chance of competing.

bisby 3y ago

Multiple major ISPs used to throttle Netflix, so that customers would have a poor experience and switch to the ISP owned streaming service. That stopped the last time net neutrality came up (that was basically WHY it came up). Right now, if there are no immediately visible negative impacts, it's because ISPs are being cautious to not get regulated, not because they won't do it again. If companies are doing nothing wrong and are just doing exactly what we want anyway, they would have no issues supporting net neutrality: "That's what we're already doing, it's a good thing!" The fact that they are so adamantly against "don't throttle your competitors traffic" is a huge red flag screaming "thats exactly what they are trying to do". So I have seen negative impacts from not having net neutrality in the past (netflix throttling), yes.

dilap 3y ago
Thanks, this makes sense.

wmf 3y ago

ISPs have been on relatively good behavior because they know that being evil will motivate net neutrality to be reinstated. Peering extortion is probably distorting competition between streaming companies but it's designed so that consumers don't see it.

perrylaj 3y ago

There are plenty of examples of real damage caused by ISPs being able to give preferential treatment to what _they_ think is important. A quick search comes up with plenty of examples: 1. ISPs limiting 3rd party VOIP solutions to avoid competition with their own VOIP solutions 2. Comcast blocking bitorrent communication was pretty obvious case of ISP preferentially limiting traffic 3. Verizon blocking text messages it didn't like the political message of 4. Verizon blocking 3rd party tethering apps, limiting users from using the bandwidth they pay for because they want to prevent competition 5. ATT prevented Facetime over their network unless users paid a higher subscription, even though users were already paying for data 6. Verizon limiting bandwidth for arbitrary reasons during natural disasters (first responders communication hampered due to limits justified through 'we don't need to follow net neutrality anymore') Those are a few, there are MANY more examples in the US alone. Ya, some or many have been rolled back due to public outcry, but they shouldn't have happened to begin with. Allowing ISPs to determine which traffic is allowed based on their own self interest is just a terrible idea. Just because you haven't been harmed by it yet doesn't mean much, especially not in a country where the majority have only one or maybe two broadband ISPs to choose from. It WILL be abused, and we know this because it already has. ISPs should be dumb pipes and not much more.

nostromo 3y ago
Do you have any examples post 2020, when net neutrality was revoked? The internet has changed dramatically in the 10+ years since most of your examples and removal of net neutrality regulation has not seemed to cause any of those issues to resurface.
- quickslowdown 3y ago
  Do you work for an ISP or something? I've seen almost this exact comment from you sprinkled all over this thread...
- Cody-99 3y ago
  Twitch left Korea because of their crazy fees that would be prohibited under net neutrality. ISPs double dip and charge websites/companies like twitch, Youtube, etc to deliver data and also charge their users money at the same time. https://restofworld.org/2024/south-korea-twitch-exit-problems-stream/ https://restofworld.org/2024/south-korea-twitch-exit-problem... >The problem stems from a “sender pays” rule instituted by South Korea’s Ministry of Science and ICT in 2016, to address the growing interconnection demands of video streaming and other bandwidth-intensive services. The rule requires companies to compensate the receiving networks for the traffic they send. It’s meant to tax heavy senders like Netflix and YouTube. Livestreaming sites like Twitch face particularly steep fees, as low latency is critical for live content. >The “sender pays” model has been widely criticized by net neutrality advocates: In a recent statement calling for the repeal of the rule in the wake of Twitch’s exit, Open Net Korea warned that it “devastates the domestic content ecosystem” and “fragments the internet.” One doesn't need an example from just a few months ago to see why this is a bad idea. Acting like the internet is so different today than 5/10 years ago so you can try to dismiss good examples is silly and acting in bad faith.

Cody-99 3y ago

In the US the obvious on is mobile providers throttling video streaming and other high bandwidth services. Globally there are other negative examples. IIRC twitch pulled out of Korea recently because they didn't want to pay ISPs to deliver their content (for which ISPs users also pay).