Sport Bikes banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,132 Posts
Well, it's been nice knowing y'all. Guess we will be put out of existence soon enough by the powers that be. What the heck. We are just serfs anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,177 Posts
Just got to wait and see if anything changes. In the end we still have the power as the customer to simply not buy the bundles and when the companies loose enough people and $$ they will correct what is causing the problem for them. Honestly if I was in charge of one of the large ISP providers or even a bit smaller one then I would not change a thing that way when everyone else pisses their customers off I get a massive business spike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,132 Posts
That's not really the issue. The issue is that the ISP may now freeze out or slow down content for whatever reason it chooses. So, if you start up a website, they can slow down the transmission of your content to a crawl. If the ISP decides to compete with Amazon, for instance, it can make Amazon's content painfully slow to load. That's probably not a huge concern, but think about this: If an ISP and a specific news content provider merge, then the ISP can make sure that news from other sources works poorly for its customers. If the ISP doesn't like Reuters, it can make Reuters really slow. Then what? They don't have complete monopolies, but they are close in some areas.

That's just fine, serfs like to be fed juicy stories about the Kardashians and numb nut political propaganda anyway. Screw net-neutrality. Now get back to work, serf!
 

·
the joke is in your hand
Joined
·
8,590 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
The republicans claim that if an isp does pick and choose what sites to slow etc is technically breaking anti trust laws. Now i wonder if they will enforce them or will they relax the current anti trust laws....
 

·
the joke is in your hand
Joined
·
8,590 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
I'm still trying to figure out how this benefits Trump directly, otherwise why do it?
Trump probably owns stock in a few of these companies that plan to start selling bundles for internet and shutting down access to news orgs trump doesnt like.
If you ask me america is under attack by this administration.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,448 Posts
There are something like 17 states are sueing the fed of this decision. It's going to be awhile before this dust settles.

Meanwhile.....2018 looms!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,177 Posts
That's not really the issue. The issue is that the ISP may now freeze out or slow down content for whatever reason it chooses. So, if you start up a website, they can slow down the transmission of your content to a crawl. If the ISP decides to compete with Amazon, for instance, it can make Amazon's content painfully slow to load. That's probably not a huge concern, but think about this: If an ISP and a specific news content provider merge, then the ISP can make sure that news from other sources works poorly for its customers. If the ISP doesn't like Reuters, it can make Reuters really slow. Then what? They don't have complete monopolies, but they are close in some areas.

That's just fine, serfs like to be fed juicy stories about the Kardashians and numb nut political propaganda anyway. Screw net-neutrality. Now get back to work, serf!
I personally like the net-neutrality laws because they made sense. I don't think much will change though because most people I would think would simply leave one ISP that is restricting speeds and such and go to one that is not doing the same things. I simply don't know yet if it will change anything or not and if there is change then how much change will be tolerated by the customers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,132 Posts
Do you have a choice? Probably not like you think. Somebody owns the cable into your house. That's who will be monkeying with speeds. It's much harder to do anything about that than it is to change your email address. The URL on your email address isn't all that important relative to who controls access. That's the ISP who will flex new muscle and restrict access. You may be lucky and have access to a cable or DSL over phone lines. That means two choices. Maybe three if you can get a satellite dish to work. Or, maybe you only have access to the satellite dish. It's monopoly in many areas, and it's oligopoly at best pretty much everywhere else.
 

·
the joke is in your hand
Joined
·
8,590 Posts
Discussion Starter #14 (Edited)
I personally like the net-neutrality laws because they made sense. I don't think much will change though because most people I would think would simply leave one ISP that is restricting speeds and such and go to one that is not doing the same things. I simply don't know yet if it will change anything or not and if there is change then how much change will be tolerated by the customers.
see that all makes sense however, ISP's just like cable and satellite already monopolize markets. where I live you have 2 choices for internet providers. the phone company or time warner cable/aka spektrum.
garbage collection...one company only
cable...spektrum or phone company. phone company has fiber optic tv/internet but it's not available where I live. so I would have to choose cable from spektrum or satellite from direct tv.
satellite ...direct tv.
electric... duke energy.

so you wont be able to just choose. you will be forced to use them. it's not going to work out in the consumer's favor. there was a reason why they came up with these laws in the first place. someone got wind of these companies drafting plans to control it. and then you always see these companies selling out to competitors such as time warner is now spektrum. dwindling down your choices even more.
the only service that isn't like that is cell phones. and I'm in total shock it's not the same way.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,448 Posts
see that all makes sense however, ISP's just like cable and satellite already monopolize markets. where I live you have 2 choices for internet providers. the phone company or time warner cable/aka spektrum.
garbage collection...one company only
cable...spektrum or phone company. phone company has fiber optic tv/internet but it's not available where I live. so I would have to choose cable from spektrum or satellite from direct tv.
satellite ...direct tv.
electric... duke energy.

so you wont be able to just choose. you will be forced to use them. it's not going to work out in the consumer's favor. there was a reason why they came up with these laws in the first place. someone got wind of these companies drafting plans to control it. and then you always see these companies selling out to competitors such as time warner is now spektrum. dwindling down your choices even more.
the only service that isn't like that is cell phones. and I'm in total shock it's not the same way.
One thing you overlooked is that the local governmental agency gave the monopoly to what every ISP(s) dominate in your town. The ISP's argument is always that unless they have a captured market they can't build out the infrastructure needed to serve a community. By the same token, the local government loves the arrangement because they get a "franchise fee" from the ISP for every subscriber (which of course is passed on to you.) And that's not just for ISP's. It's the same for all the utilities: Phone, power, gas, etc. Basically, cities and counties award monopolies to businesses in exchange for money. The residents pick that all up, of course. (How many of you go to city council meetings? Huh? Huh?)

When I was briefly a city councilman in the town I lived in, it was quite an awakening to see how much money the city government made off of those fees. YUGE!

Some coomunities are attempting to establish cooperative ISPs which are locally owned and wirelessly passed to to residents via hot spots or even by laying their own cable, but the ISPs are a fighting back in the courts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,254 Posts
40% of Americans have a single choice for broadband access. 38% of those are locked into a company that has violated some aspect of net neutrality. Of those lucky Americans with 2 choices, some 50 million have to choose between both companies being violators.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,177 Posts
I know I have several choices. Verizon fios, cable, dsl, dish, and even using a hotspot from my wireless provider. I have specific things I use the internet at home for and if those things got the speeds reduced to a point that it changes my enjoyment of those things then I would change service.... and if they are all the same then I would simply drop the internet and do everything through wifi on the phone or something like that. The things I NEED the internet for do not require a bunch of speed so I am willing to drop to dial up if it gets that bad. I would rather be out riding the bike anyway.

But net neutrality was not a bad thing and it should have stayed. We will see.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,254 Posts
Not for nothing, but there are neighborhoods in NYC that have a single BB provider. If you work from home, I doubt a family data plan is going to help move large amount of data over a month.

In other news, seems the FCC has plenty on their plate. Come February they're expected to reclassify cell service as "broadband." That'll definitely help those smaller places looking towards grant money to actually build out real broadband.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top