How does Anandtech feel about the FCC trying to change the rules of the Internet? (Net Neutrality)

[SMOGZINN]

At least the net neutrality gutting might finally convince the 18-29 demographic to get off their asses and vote in 2018 and 2020.

Nope, the ISPs can now just block all their Facebook posts about it. If they can't Instagram themselves voting then what is the point?

 

[Younigue]

But cheers to minds far smarter than mine figuring it out. So far the net hasn't been able to be controlled. I know it won't be legal necessarily but that hasn't stopped a lot of people from getting what they want from their use of it. Again, not sure how it would be possible but I'm kind of convinced some geniuses out there won't stand for what this would mean for Americans. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong but if I'm right it'll likely be amusing as fu*k.

 

[mindless1]

They could de-prioritize VPNs too.

 

[bshole]

They could de-prioritize VPNs too.

I basically get all my news from the internet. It is good to know that corporations with a financial interest in certain information getting out will now have the complete LEGAL right to block any news site they choose.

We should all thank for Trump and the Republicans for not attacking our free speech and free press rights.

 

[greatnoob]

Republican retards are blaming this on Obama. Lol, it's sad that even I, as a non-Murican, am more informed on US policies than the millions of [R] voting retards.

 

[HomerJS]

Someone corrupted the comments section for the repeal of NN. AG of New York has found over 2 million fake posts. FCC has not responded for months. Lawsuit is beginning.

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/364933-new-york-ag-to-sue-fcc-over-net-neutrality-repeal

 

[outriding]

VPNs, perhaps. But my experience with VPNs has not been good. I've never come close to achieving my full connection's bandwidth through a VPN provider, and I've tried several and many different server locations from each of them.

Pia works good for me. I was able to configure it on my router so all traffic out of my place is encrypted

 

[Zorba]

If the large content companies worked together, the could get this to backfire on the ISPs. Basically, they could all decide to pay the ransom money to one ISP in an area. Who would keep Comcast, if they couldn't get to google, amazon, netflix or steam when they could get to all those from the local phone company on DSL. Go even further and if any ISP asks for ransom money, just block all of your site from their service. This is basically what all the media companies have always done to the cable companies.

 

[Zorba]

Oh yeah, and fuck Republicans. At least with tax cuts, it is possible to believe that they believe they are trying to do the right thing. There is no way to spin the repeal of NN as anything but a total giveaway to big businesses that have natural and regulated monopolies.

 

[ultimatebob]

I would love to see this backfire on the big ISP's, and we start seeing people using mesh networking for local urban file transfer networks for sharing their media. I could see it working in large metropolitan areas now that high speed Wi-Fi is become commonplace, and it would be a bitch for copyright holders to regulate. Shut down one access point, and three more will replace it!

Comcast and Verizon might be able to legally block BitTorrent downloads now that Net Neutrality has been abolished, but this next gen peer to peer file sharing network will be something that they can't control.

 

[railer]

So...the internet will go back to being exactly as it was prior to 2015.
OK.
I get that Trump is an idiot and all...but besides that I'm not anticipating any noticeable changes whatsoever with the passage of this.

 

[Fenixgoon]

So...the internet will go back to being exactly as it was prior to 2015.
OK.
I get that Trump is an idiot and all...but besides that I'm not anticipating any noticeable changes whatsoever with the passage of this.

if you ever used facetime, in 2012-2013 AT&T blocked facetime
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...pps-fails-to-mention-how-it-blocked-facetime/

don't forget VZW limiting netflix
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...-should-be-investigated-by-fcc-petition-says/


so yes, ISPs have, can, and will begin to block services or otherwise create prioritized services for which you have to pay extra

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...-not-to-charge-tolls-for-internet-fast-lanes/

 

[Younigue]

So...the internet will go back to being exactly as it was prior to 2015.
OK.
I get that Trump is an idiot and all...but besides that I'm not anticipating any noticeable changes whatsoever with the passage of this.

You seem like a fool.

 

[Meghan54]

So...the internet will go back to being exactly as it was prior to 2015.
OK.
I get that Trump is an idiot and all...but besides that I'm not anticipating any noticeable changes whatsoever with the passage of this.

Here's a good but, unfortunately, longish reply to that line of thought:

One of the most commonly cited reasons for overturning the 2015 regulations is that internet service providers abided by neutrality principles before the rules were adopted. As we’ve written before, that’s not entirely accurate. When Americans first began dialing up in the 1990s, it was via phone lines that were regulated under Title II of the Communications Act, meaning they could not discriminate based on the content. When the phone companies began switching to DSL broadband for internet access, that too was regulated under Title II. That’s why the FCC intervened in an oft-cited case in which Madison River Communications, a small DSL provider, blocked access to Vonage, an internet phone service. DSL was regulated under Title II at the time, allowing the FCC to step in and compel Madison River to restore access to Vonage. Rules regulating internet conduct weren’t new in 2015, either. The FCC first outlined protections for internet users in a 2005 policy statement, and then created a more robust set of rules in 2010. Rolling back Title II protections for broadband doesn’t restore the internet to some glorious past in which broadband providers operated unfettered. It ushers the internet into a brave new world in which the FCC is hopeless to stop future attempts to prioritize or suppress certain kinds of traffic.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/tech...-net-neutrality-meeting/ar-BBGL8ss?li=BBnbklF

 

[ch33zw1z]

So...the internet will go back to being exactly as it was prior to 2015.
OK.
I get that Trump is an idiot and all...but besides that I'm not anticipating any noticeable changes whatsoever with the passage of this.

as others have the point, ill just add that this is the green light ISPs have been waiting for. let the pillag begin. as i only have comcast or cell towers available for connections, i anxiously await my approved screwing.

 

[ImpulsE69]

So...the internet will go back to being exactly as it was prior to 2015.
OK.
I get that Trump is an idiot and all...but besides that I'm not anticipating any noticeable changes whatsoever with the passage of this.

I think many people don't understand the greed this is trying to curb. Sure the internet was great and free for many years, but then as more of the bigger players saw the possibilities, things started to change right under peoples noses - beyond the obvious local monopolies. It was the acts of a few companies that brought about regulation because they started suing the FCC when they were challenged for some actions. The regulations were put in place to stop that.

Cliff Notes:
Companies are greedy. It's about the biggest fastest buck you can make no matter how you do it. A few instances showed everyone what COULD happen. Risk was assessed and regulations put in place.

 

[Mai72]

Anonymous just got involved.

It's going to get real bad for a few people. You don't mess with Anonymous.

 

[Mai72]

Thoughts on Google Fiber?

Will Google start pushing their services more since the FCC ruling? I haven't heard much about Google fiber. It's why I'm asking.

 

[ultimatebob]

Thoughts on Google Fiber?

Will Google start pushing their services more since the FCC ruling? I haven't heard much about Google fiber. It's why I'm asking.

I think of Google Fiber like dating a supermodel. Sounds great in theory, but will never happen in my lifetime. They've been around for 5 years now, and it's still only available in what... 7 cities total?

At this point, I think that the real point of Google Fiber was to scare the telcos and cable companies to upgrade their networks before competition arrives. What really happened is that their competition buried Google in red tape and litigation, insuring that they can only expand at a snail's pace.

 

[bshole]

if you ever used facetime, in 2012-2013 AT&T blocked facetime
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...pps-fails-to-mention-how-it-blocked-facetime/

don't forget VZW limiting netflix
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...-should-be-investigated-by-fcc-petition-says/


so yes, ISPs have, can, and will begin to block services or otherwise create prioritized services for which you have to pay extra

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...-not-to-charge-tolls-for-internet-fast-lanes/

And they can now legally block news sites. The majority of Americans use the internet almost exclusively for news. If news sites get blocked, it is essentially an attack on the free press. It really doesn't get any more unconstitutional than that. Unfortunately I have no faith that our Supreme Court gives a tinkers damn about the Constitution.

 

[ultimatebob]

And they can now legally block news sites. The majority of Americans use the internet almost exclusively for news. If news sites get blocked, it is essentially an attack on the free press. It really doesn't get any more unconstitutional than that. Unfortunately I have no faith that our Supreme Court gives a tinkers damn about the Constitution.

I doubt that censoring news sites is going to happen, since now you're messing with 1st amendment concerns. You don't need net neutrality to block that, since there are other laws for that.

 

[bshole]

I doubt that censoring news sites is going to happen, since now you're messing with 1st amendment concerns. You don't need net neutrality to block that, since there are other laws for that.

How can you say that knowing that Verizon has already done such a thing? Not against a news site per se but against an organization attempting to spread a political message.

Erin Shields, who works as the Center for Media Justice’s national field organizer for internet rights, told HuffPost that she sees that potential for censorship as a problem.

“It’s not a stretch to believe that, moving forward, we may see some kind of censorship of content that concerns things that corporations might find controversial,” Shields said. She pointed out that even asking a nonprofit to pay for quicker delivery speeds can be detrimental to their cause, as it leaves that organization with fewer resources to, say, support LGBT youth.

The issue finds some precedent in a 2007 dispute between the abortion rights group NARAL Pro-Choice America and Verizon, which owns HuffPost’s parent company, Oath. Verizon refused to allow NARAL to use its network for a promotional text message program, citing its own right to block “controversial or unsavory” content. A 2007 New York Times report noted that Verizon “appeared to be acting against its own economic interests,” as NARAL would have paid for the access.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...d-people-of-color_us_5a32c000e4b0ff955ad11f10

 

[Puffnstuff]

Thoughts on Google Fiber?

Will Google start pushing their services more since the FCC ruling? I haven't heard much about Google fiber. It's why I'm asking.

Last I read they had funding issues and really scaled back their expansion plans. If you go to the link and scroll down you can see where they offer service. They show my city under potential sites but with AT&T rolling out their fiber service already I doubt it.

https://fiber.google.com/about/

 

[HomerJS]

So...the internet will go back to being exactly as it was prior to 2015.
OK.
I get that Trump is an idiot and all...but besides that I'm not anticipating any noticeable changes whatsoever with the passage of this.

By your own logic then there was no need to pass it.

 

[shortylickens]

Ajit may be getting sued for his video


http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-kno...ators-threaten-to-sue-over-fcc-chairmans-anti


Thats actually kinda funny.