• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

U.S. House Votes to Allow Cable Providers to Throttle Internet

ISPs should be allowed to throttle the internet if they want to. I think this is good legislation. And it's not from Wall Street.
 
Anarchist420 said:
ISPs should be allowed to throttle the internet if they want to. I think this is good legislation. And it's not from Wall Street.
Click to expand...

I did not say it was from wall street. However it probably is influenced in some manner. Business are influenced by wall street, lobbyists hired by businesses. Follow the bread crumbs.
 
spidey07 said:
Reasonable network management to ensure good service for all customers.
Click to expand...

god you are full of it on this topic, as always.

yes lets praise antoher setp toward an entertainment monopoly that is only good for billion dollar companies who are now free to never upgrade infrastructure till they run out of traffic to block.

this shit should scare anyone who likes stead, d2d, gog, NETFLIX, HULU etc.
 
Last edited:
shortylickens said:
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=20947

Shorty's thoughts?

Most of those old guys have no idea how modern things work or how modern people live. They are at the mercy of the lobbyists to tell them whats best.
Click to expand...

Could be, but I suspect they fully know how Business Works and/or prefers to Work. This seems fairly clear to be a way to Maximize Profit and minimize the need for more Infrastructure Spending. One could always hope that Competition will push further Innovation, but at this time I suspect that will be very spotty as most of those capable of competing in the Market are already in the Market.
 
My net is already throttled. Business as usual. Next up is a meter per GB. Lose lose lose all around for the consumer.
 
More tolls to pay to the robber barons.

They already lie about the speed of service they supply and they hope you are stupid enough to think that paying more means premium service/content. It just means more for them, less for you. As usual.
 
Anarchist420 said:
ISPs should be allowed to throttle the internet if they want to. I think this is good legislation. And it's not from Wall Street.
Click to expand...

The only problem with that, is if they go too far.

We don't have a choice given the monopolies out there. If there were competition I would agree with you, but as things stand now these companies can do anything and we'd have to bend over and take it.
 
Anarchist420 said:
It could stop prices from going up.
Click to expand...

Wow, what drugs are you taking?

From the article:

Republicans seem dead set against preventing internet service providers from throttling traffic or slowing/speeding up website access. They also tend to oppose on a state basis allowing local communities to spend their government dollars to set up independent municipal internet access -- even if the citizens in that community want the service and are paying for it with their own tax dollars. They have championed several efforts to stop municipal internet projects.

Together these stances serve to cement the power of a handful of telecoms and cable providers like Comcast, Time Warner, Verizon Wireless, etc. And that means a fat payday for these players.

Republicans are being rewarded handsomely for their loyalty. Various telecoms raised millions for John McCain's 2008 Presidential run and they provided free service to his personal ranch. Many other Congressional Republicans enjoy similar perks

Along with the push for metered internet plans, all of this means that customers will be paying more, while getting less -- less website access, less speed, and less traffic types.
 
her209 said:
In other words, "will of the People" only matters when you agree with it.

😀
Click to expand...

It means more money for his employer which he thinks will mean more money in his paycheck . Of course he's for it, it will enable him to make more frivilous bets.
 
Jaskalas said:
The only problem with that, is if they go too far.

We don't have a choice given the monopolies out there. If there were competition I would agree with you, but as things stand now these companies can do anything and we'd have to bend over and take it.
Click to expand...
I don't think they will go too far, because if they do, a new competitor will step in.
 
I also read the Daily Tech Article and it failed to mention that AT&T's monopoly was government granted.

This is also something that should be left up to the States really.
 
Red Dawn said:
It means more money for his employer which he thinks will mean more money in his paycheck . Of course he's for it, it will enable him to make more frivilous bets.
Click to expand...

I'm very shocked by the acknowledgment of shills lately.

What brought about the turnabout?
 
Anarchist420 said:
I don't think they will go too far, because if they do, a new competitor will step in.
Click to expand...

Did the word monopoly escape you?

Competitors aren't exactly allowed when the telcos own the lines running to your house. The only alternative is to run another line, but that will 1: not be permitted by the government and 2: would be extremely expensive.

You want each new competitor digging up your street, your yard, to each lay their own fiber?
 
Guys, given the technical nature of this news I'm pretty sure we can hold the discussion without personal attacks this time.

Also, I should clarify something. I dont necessarily think the politicians are out to screw the people and hook up big business. My point was they are so clueless of modern technology they tend to rely on others to do their thinking for them. Specifically lobbyists.
 
No, the word monopoly did not escape me. If the monopoly goes too far, then someone with more money will buy their lines.

And the government is apparently at fault if they don't let companies make more lines.

Finally, in a free society, it would be up to each yard owner if the new competitors could dig up their yard.
 
Like most legislation this is mostly aimed at minorities.

The poor and college students who are increasingly using services like Netflix as a cheap alternative to cable, kids who game online, etc. Your average adult checking his email or shopping won't notice any difference. Those who espouse "free enterprise" will never know just how high a price they are paying for inferior service because there will be nothing to compare with.

It's the old magician's trick of distraction. Congress waves its hands about cutting the deficit, creating jobs, reducing taxes, and then nickel and dimes you when you aren't looking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top