Politics

(Discuss literally anything here including introductions)

Re: Politics

Postby Mr. Frozen » Wed Nov 22, 2017 3:15 am

Yep, this Pai guy straight up just wants to repeal net neutrality. He is blatantly using doubletalk when describing this latest move, stating that this is about "freedom" and "innovation." He avoids using any words that suggest this is related to net neutrality, opting to use vague phrases such as "Obama-era regulations" without even trying to explain what he means exactly. When pressed on the matter he sticks to the script, repeating how he wants more freedom in the market. This is because the regulations he refers to were created with the intentions to preserve net neutrality. His arguments about how the rules stifle innovation and prevents ISPs from raising money to improve infrastructure are pure bullshit. Elon Musk's internet plan is innovation. Google Fiber and Google Fi is innovation. Pai's idea of repealing net neutrality is pure greed. It is blatantly obvious that he wants ISPs to fuck over their customers, I couldn't even try to intelligently spin this any other way if I wanted to. Then again I haven't bothered trying to find the original text of these regulations, but I am assuming that they are what Obama said they were.
User avatar
Mr. Frozen
Machine Gun Fist
Machine Gun Fist
 
Joined: September 2003
Location: Earth

Re: Politics

Postby south carmain » Wed Nov 22, 2017 7:29 am

phpBB [video]
User avatar
south carmain
Comrade of the motherland
"Keep Friends"
 
Joined: February 2012
Favorite title: Shenmue IIx
Currently playing: okami hd

Re: Politics

Postby Sonikku » Sat Nov 25, 2017 4:10 pm

Image

Sonikku has received 2 thanks from: KiBa, Mr357
User avatar
Sonikku
News Poster
News Poster
 
Joined: May 2003

Re: Politics

Postby InsanityIsCrazy » Mon Nov 27, 2017 12:37 pm

Sonikku wrote: Image



So.....

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/ ... tes-183468

You guys were saying?


That initial thought stemmed from the near-mass outcry of Pai being some sort of Vader-esque character that would single-handedly destroy the internet. Considering the video two posts up, I'd say that sentiment is still around (because net neutrality is EXACTLY like millions of people getting murdered). Not entirely misplaced, I guess?

I wouldn't be human if I couldn't say I was wrong on this one. I was wrong on this one! I stand by the lobotomy statement, though.

Gonna need at least a day to pry through the big paper: https://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releas ... 7927A1.pdf

Mr. Frozen wrote:Google Fiber is innovation.

Google Fiber is dead. Someone on the inside admitted as much to me a few months ago.
User avatar
InsanityIsCrazy
Man Mo Acolyte
Man Mo Acolyte
 
Joined: November 2004
Location: TN
XBL: InsanityIsCrazy
Favorite title: Shenmue
Currently playing: Some Gizmo

Re: Politics

Postby sand4fish » Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:27 pm

I don't know how anyone would want Net Neutrality dead Republican supporter or not. This is so anti-American which was the core of free expression and democratic principles.

Giving ISPs full control to block and filter your own access to information? Think of the ramifications. You the consumer will ended paying higher internet fees for any extra content access they allow (free now while they can't control) which they will mask as providing a wider selection of services for your picking later down the road.

Worse yet, it will give the giant corporations the ability to afford payments for preferential treatment in the online arena and simply obliterate any innovation coming from competitors. Say goodbye to the next Airbnb, Uber or Etsy that I know a lot of you enjoy.

December 14 is coming, and with the current FCC's board consisting of 3 Republicans and 2 Democrats with history being that voting along the party lines is the rule of thumb, prepare to say bye to free America.

Unless you need to feel like a privileged prick and glad to pay more to have more access to stuff than others (including game streaming), then below are some links which can allow you to do something about it:

Free Press Action Fund

Battle For The Net

5 calls net neutrality page includes instructions, scripts, and tools to call your members of Congress and the FCC.

ACLU
User avatar
sand4fish
"After Burner...Great!"
"After Burner...Great!"
 
Joined: November 2013
Favorite title: Shenmue

Re: Politics

Postby Mr. Frozen » Sat Dec 02, 2017 3:04 am

sand4fish wrote: I don't know how anyone would want Net Neutrality dead Republican supporter or not. This is so anti-American which was the core of free expression and democratic principles.


If by anti-american you mean "limitation of freedom", enforcing "net neutrality" is actually the exact opposite. It is a government regulation that prevents ISPs from doing whatever they want. I put "net neutrality" in quotes because it is a loaded phrase that makes everyone who is against it sound like a loon. This is really about classifying the internet as a Title I (unregulated) or Title II (common carrier) service. Under Title II the internet is classified as a common carrier and the FCC gets to dictate what these ISPs can and cannot do with the infrastructure they laid down. If you take this to the extreme, this means that the FCC can decide that you will need to provide porn providers with photo IDs before they are able to send their data to you over the network. Yes, data cannot not be discriminated under common carrier laws, but the government can still decide what data gets to get on the network to begin with. This is the type of control that the republicans hate, and which is why many are against it. Airplanes are a common carrier, but the government does actively decide who can and cannot board them every day. But yea, I do agree with you that no one should be against "net neutrality", but for a different reason.

These common carrier laws were put into place to prevent monopolies and keep the market free. The internet grew so fast because data was subject to the common carrier laws, which allowed new ISPs to enter the market and provide customers with good service at a decent price (hell towards the end of the century you could literally get free internet). Then broadband cable internet came along in the early 2000s, which forced the FCC to take another look at internet classification. This time the FCC said "You know what, lets reclassify the internet as a Title I service and let the ISPs do whatever they want." This forced any newcomer to the ISP market to pay for their own infrastructure if they wanted to provide customers with broadband internet. The only ISPs that came out on top were the ones who benefited from the common carrier kickbacks they got from their other services (cable TV and telephone). These big guys also gobbled up all of the other little guys, snuffing out all the competition. To add salt to the wound they also lobbied for ridiculous local regulations that made sure new ISPs couldn't compete. This is how we ended up with this bullshit:

phpBB [video]


The whole issue of "net neutrality" was just icing on an already terrible cake. These guys were already on top of the world but decided to get more greedy and try to control the internet traffic. This mess was fixed in 2015 by reclassifying the internet as a Title II service.

The big ISPs are trying to strip this again because the house and senate have a republican majority and republicans get a hardon whenever they hear deregulation. However, this deregulation will ensure that ISPs will create a monopoly on the market (like they basically already have).

Mr. Frozen has received a thanks from: Sonikku
User avatar
Mr. Frozen
Machine Gun Fist
Machine Gun Fist
 
Joined: September 2003
Location: Earth

Re: Politics

Postby sand4fish » Sun Dec 03, 2017 12:15 am

^ Dude, I agree with you but I don't see how I'm seeing it different than you by my post. Yeah, I'm not talking about "limitation of freedom" in that sense. As we learn in school that our economy is not simply guided by an invisible hand, expectations of a non government intervention in other aspects of our lives is beyond realms of absurd.

Anyway, good points.
User avatar
sand4fish
"After Burner...Great!"
"After Burner...Great!"
 
Joined: November 2013
Favorite title: Shenmue

Re: Politics

Postby InsanityIsCrazy » Mon Dec 04, 2017 9:22 am

I'm in agreement on the ISP issue, since infrastructure has long been a problem due to who actually "owns" the landlines. If I'm reading that politico article linked up above correctly, though, wouldn't the blocking of state regulations eliminate the ability of the big ISPs to lobby locally? That sounds like one of the big hurdles to creating local competition. Similar to Google Fiber, I've heard local power companies are wiling to offer their own version of fiber-optic services.

Another thing that's been doomsday-scenario'd is the throttling of services, from known cases such as Verizon and AT&T. I will say that could be a problem, but I'll also say it's not just going to be from them:

A week after the wireless carriers were accused of throttling video speeds on their networks, Netflix has stepped forward to take the blame for the degraded video quality. The popular streaming-video service told the Wall Street Journal on Thursday it has been slowing its video transmission on wireless carriers around the world, including Verizon and AT&T, for five years to "protect consumers from exceeding mobile data caps."

Netflix's reasoning doesn't take into account that AT&T has millions of customers on unlimited data plans who have been receiving degraded video quality despite not being subjected to data caps.
User avatar
InsanityIsCrazy
Man Mo Acolyte
Man Mo Acolyte
 
Joined: November 2004
Location: TN
XBL: InsanityIsCrazy
Favorite title: Shenmue
Currently playing: Some Gizmo

Re: Politics

Postby Sonikku » Sat Dec 09, 2017 1:23 am


Sonikku has received a thanks from: Rakim
User avatar
Sonikku
News Poster
News Poster
 
Joined: May 2003

Re: Politics

Postby Sonikku » Thu Dec 14, 2017 2:37 am

phpBB [video]
User avatar
Sonikku
News Poster
News Poster
 
Joined: May 2003

Re: Politics

Postby Mr. Frozen » Fri Dec 15, 2017 1:32 am

The FCC voted in favor of repealing the classification of Title II rights for ISPs today. I'm not surprised but this isn't the end of it.
User avatar
Mr. Frozen
Machine Gun Fist
Machine Gun Fist
 
Joined: September 2003
Location: Earth

Re: Politics

Postby shredingskin » Sat Dec 16, 2017 5:14 am

So basically, what is the point of disposing net neutrality ?

Most corporativism at least has some kind of narrative behind it, what's the narrative here ? Poor network conglomerates are losing jobs to censored china ??

I don't really see the uptoken for almost anybody besides the already monopoly of telecomunications.

EDIT: this seems like a billion dollar idea made to create fake competition with an uncensored internet protocol, or if you're lazy pay a little extra to access free "free premium content".

EDIT2: so basically the point is that very big companies are also (part)owners/beneficiaries with the isp providers, so it's a rigged game, and those are raising the price of a finite bandwith. That's the narrative. And a fair one, sadly internet/cellphone, are practical monopolies in reality.

It'll be funny when you have to pay an extra ammount of money for getting netflitx... oh wait...
User avatar
shredingskin
Machine Gun Fist
Machine Gun Fist
 
Joined: March 2012
Location: Argentina
Favorite title: Shenmue
Currently playing: Some indie games.

Re: Politics

Postby south carmain » Sat Dec 16, 2017 2:48 pm

Well this fucking sucks. Hopeffuly they'll be able to get the decision *please subscribe to our ultra-premium online social package to gain access to the rest of this post*

south carmain has received 2 thanks from: MiTT3NZ, Mr357
User avatar
south carmain
Comrade of the motherland
"Keep Friends"
 
Joined: February 2012
Favorite title: Shenmue IIx
Currently playing: okami hd

Re: Politics

Postby Mr. Frozen » Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:12 am

shredingskin wrote: So basically, what is the point of disposing net neutrality ?

Most corporativism at least has some kind of narrative behind it, what's the narrative here ? Poor network conglomerates are losing jobs to censored china ??

I don't really see the uptoken for almost anybody besides the already monopoly of telecomunications.

EDIT: this seems like a billion dollar idea made to create fake competition with an uncensored internet protocol, or if you're lazy pay a little extra to access free "free premium content".

EDIT2: so basically the point is that very big companies are also (part)owners/beneficiaries with the isp providers, so it's a rigged game, and those are raising the price of a finite bandwith. That's the narrative. And a fair one, sadly internet/cellphone, are practical monopolies in reality.

It'll be funny when you have to pay an extra ammount of money for getting netflitx... oh wait...


Bandwidth is never an issue. The whole issue about this "net neutrality" thing is the ISPs wanting to have control over the data sent through their networks. Remember back in the early 2000s where the RIAA and MPAA tried its hardest to stop piracy? They gave a fuckton of money to ISPs to coerce them to implement systems that discouraged pirates. Comcast is the only one that actually implemented network traffic priority rules, by giving low priority to torrent traffic, making torrents extremely slow to download for its users. There are also a few things like this that happened over the years, which is why the internet made a big fuss about net neutrality a few years back.

The potential positive thing about users is that tiered pricing models *can* make the internet cheaper for some users. A family who just needs the internet for their child to access school websites can now have it at home for a low base package price. Just look at this graphic:

Image

The image is 100% net neutrality propaganda aimed at internet heavy users (the limits imposed are completely ridiculous), but this looks amazing to someone who doesn't use the internet often. Their bill will go down from $70 to $30, which is how I am sure ISPs will market it if they ever do go the tiered route. I don't think they will though since users almost always have the option to go wireless. There is also a new DSL technology (G.fast) that allows over 1Gbps over copper (this is in lab conditions over a distance of 100m. I'd say 50Mbps is more realistic), which will allow us to use our telephone lines for internet again.

Another reason I don't think the tiered model will go through is that people will find a way around it. Find a way to make the ISP think your traffic is going to facebook or something for fast, cheap internet. This is 100% possible right now btw, and is possible with any service that allows users to directly talk to each other. If ISPs in the US ever do go a tiered route, I would personally write a program myself to circumvent it.
User avatar
Mr. Frozen
Machine Gun Fist
Machine Gun Fist
 
Joined: September 2003
Location: Earth

Re: Politics

Postby MiTT3NZ » Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:13 am

From the outside lookin in it seems that the monopoly a handful of ISPs have is the issue. Over here BT has a monopoly on the lines themselves (Virgins are better but don't reach everywhere), so all ISPs who use BT lines have to rent them, and in turn the customer is charged line rental.

The upside to this is the diversity in packages. TalkTalk will provide cheaper Internet with slower speeds whereas BT n Virgin are the "superspeed" connections that come at a premium. And of course each provider offers multi-tiered packages anyway.

Of course I'm not saying it'd work over there. We're a much smaller country which is easier to maintain (well, I say easier... There's roadworks constantly goin on that cover about 90% of the nation at any given time!)

However you've also got to consider the fact that the Internet is a vital component of modern day life. You actually have to have it to perform most essential admin-based tasks such as tax returns, job applications, and anything else that used to involve paper forms.

Unless of course the US has actually fallen behind the rest of the developed world as has recently been suggested.
ImageImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
MiTT3NZ
Class A Cunt
Shenmue III
 
Joined: January 2005
Location: Manchester, innit!
XBL: Mittens2317
Steam: Mittens2317
Favorite title: Shenmue
Currently playing: Football Manager 2012

PreviousNext

Return to Off Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 13 guests

Powered by phpBB © 2000-
ShenmueDojo.net