4 ms·
> ban paid prioritization, and the blocking and throttling of lawful content and services. Too bad the regulation isnt simply this one line of text without the
by wnevets 12y ago
> ban paid prioritization, and the blocking and throttling of lawful content and services.
Too bad the regulation isnt simply this one line of text without the "lawful" caveat
- EpicEng 12y agoWhy is that too bad? Do you think that the rules would stand of that caveat weren't present? Do you think that ISP's should not have the ability to block illegal traffic? What happens when they receive a court order to do so, yet doing so would violate FCC regulations? Don't be naive; that exception must be there, and out changes nothing in regards to the current situation.
- wnevets 12y agoMy biggest problem with that caveat is that its really just a foot in the door for further regulation by the federal government, none of which has anything to do with network neutrality. Network neutrality by definition is about all packets being treated equally regardless of the source or destination.
- EpicEng 12y agoIt's not though because it changes nothing. The government can already stop traffic via a court order. Besides, the FCC is not a legislative body. A set of rules which allowed, for example, unimpeded access to child pornography would never be allowed, nor should it. Net neutrality can exist alongside the laws which govern what is and is not ok to do on the internet.
- wnevets 12y agoDoes the FCC currently have rules that allow the blocking of "illegal" traffic?
- dragonwriter 12y agoThe FCC currently has no rules on blocking, so providers can freely block legal and illegal traffic. (The FCC adopted non-blocking rules for lawful content and applications in the previous Open Internet Order that was struck down by the courts.)
- EpicEng 12y agoIt's not though because it changes nothing. The government can already stop traffic via a court order. Besides, the FCC is not a legislative body. A set of rules which allowed, for example, unimpeded access to child pornography would never be allowed, nor should it. Net neutrality can exist alongside the laws which govern what is and is not ok to do on the internet.
- 0x5f3759df-i 12y agoThis is still better than no ban on lawful or unlawful content
- acdha 12y agoIt also protects blocking or throttling a DDoS, spammer, malware scans, etc. This kind of protection is necessary but we really need to see both the actual rules and what the actual enforcement will look like.