|
R.I.P. Net Neutrality
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 14 January, 2014
Your traffic will no longer be treated equally.
The Court of Appeals for the D.C. circuit has effectively killed net neutrality in the U.S., striking down a 2010 Federal Communications Commission plan to block ISPs from playing favorites among websites.
For example, the major ISPs (not including Comcast that has to adhere to net neutrality rules until 2018), can now throttle speeds ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
Tazer247
Member
|
14. January 2014 @ 23:55 |
Link to this message
|
Trapped in a monopoly hooray!
I already can hardly watch youtube videos at 480p with 30mbps down.
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
Mysttic
Senior Member
|
15. January 2014 @ 03:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
It should also be noted on numerous other sites reporting the FCC does plan to appeal this decision. This isn't the end of court battles yet. Honestly if they wanted to argue this in fair play, they should point out the new technologies coming out in the future will require that net neutrality remain in-tacked. Bad enough a lot of the ISPs are allowed to set ridiculously low caps with huge overage charges.
|
|
ivymike
Member
|
15. January 2014 @ 05:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
I wonder how much money the ISP's paid the judges on this panel that made this decision.....
|
|
Justoneguy
Member
|
15. January 2014 @ 10:03 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ivymike:
I wonder how much money the ISP's paid the judges on this panel that made this decision.....
What ever it was, it is a pittance compared to what they stand to gain if this holds up.
Why are we still calling these people judges? Once they're bought, judgement is no longer a factor.
|
|
Mysttic
Senior Member
|
15. January 2014 @ 11:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
In the end it doesn't even matter what comes out of this ruling, as once the majority of consumers get too fed up with overpriced garbage, any impact on the decision today may change tomorrow.
|
|
ddp
Moderator
|
15. January 2014 @ 15:03 |
Link to this message
|
|
Mysttic, don't count on it, look at the price of gas.
|
|
Mysttic
Senior Member
|
15. January 2014 @ 15:23 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Mysttic, don't count on it, look at the price of gas.
Ok, but you don't get charged stupid things like extra overage/galon when you fill up jerry cans after topping off your tank.
With new technologies releasing in the near future that's handling higher levels of streaming from 4K-TV and movies to eventually games: ISPs will either have to release some of their stupid throttling and overage charges or sink to first provider that does.
Change is already happening within the mobile world (at least in US, look how T-Mobile is attempting to steal clients through their methods). It will eventually happen with internet providers as well. Otherwise the only other option is for the majority of consumers is to simply not run the next generation of technology requiring ISPs to catch up. And should that happen, that'll piss off more than just consumers, but also corporations that are advancing our technology.
I guess the end point I trying to make here is even though gas prices are high - at least when you fill up you know for this price you are going to get what you pay for. With internet companies now free to throttle should they choose, you now no longer know what you get for what you pay for. You do a contract or no for internet, and you read what you get: it doesn't tell you what sites they will throttle and which ones they won't. I think if the FFC ruling is going to be rejected by the highest court in the next turn of appeals, they at least should consider forcing ISPs to relent said bandwidth records to the public so they can make a sound decision on whom to do business with.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 15. January 2014 @ 15:29
|
|
sternrulez
Junior Member
|
16. January 2014 @ 07:07 |
Link to this message
|
This explains why the MPAA joined W3 the other day....sigh....
|
|
xnonsuchx
Senior Member
|
16. January 2014 @ 08:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
The court didn't disagree that net neutrality is a good thing...only whether currently law/regulation protects it enough. Unfortunately, Congress really needs to pass a law that protects it, but there may not be enough politicians not being bought off by the corporations involved to pass such a thing.
I can find many court decisions I WISH went the other way, but I don't often find such decisions very unsound. Only when I find totally hypocritical opinions across multiple cases (a few Supreme Court justices come to mind) do I get particularly concerned.
|
Senior Member
|
16. January 2014 @ 08:24 |
Link to this message
|
|
here in australia most isp don't actually charge for overuse they just reduce your speed until next payment.
@ mysttic
interesting comparison with gas prices but as proved by media and as i suspected petrol is australia is tampered with.yeah you save 8cents a litre here but get less milage.also we have limits on vouchers that can be used for cheaper petrol maximum 168 litres i think.
custom built gaming pc from early 2010,ps2 with 15 games all original,ps3 500gbs with 5 games all original,yamaha amp and 5.1channel surround sound speakers,46inch sony lcd smart tv.
|
|
Mysttic
Senior Member
|
16. January 2014 @ 12:14 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
here in australia most isp don't actually charge for overuse they just reduce your speed until next payment.
That must be nice as here in Canada and I know some ISPs in US they actually charge $1.00-1.50 / GB over your limit but let you keep the same speed. Personally I'd accept a slower connection if it meant no overage fees, so long as I could browse for the news and what not.
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
16. January 2014 @ 19:08 |
Link to this message
|
Hmmm, back to the bad old days it seems, good job there are still a lot of unlimited services available (even if many do have supposed 'fair use' policies attached - around 250gb a month with some from what I've read).
Here in the UK BT is offering one of their fibre deals (the slower one) which looks reasonable until you look at the fine print, it's cheap but limited to 20gb a month.... and £5 per gb (about $8.18) penalty if you go over.
|
|
ddp
Moderator
|
16. January 2014 @ 20:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
had that 20gig cap when i was with rogers for about $50 a month but ususally used about 2 or 3 gigs of that with a 400 to 500kb download. switched over to bell with 100 gig cap with about 1.2mb download for about same price & i still use about the same amount as when 1 was on rogers.
|
Senior Member
|
16. January 2014 @ 23:07 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Mysttic:
Originally posted by xboxdvl2:
here in australia most isp don't actually charge for overuse they just reduce your speed until next payment.
That must be nice as here in Canada and I know some ISPs in US they actually charge $1.00-1.50 / GB over your limit but let you keep the same speed. Personally I'd accept a slower connection if it meant no overage fees, so long as I could browse for the news and what not.
Dunno if xboxdvl2 is talking about mobile broadband but usually the limits are usually set quite high for landline in Oz (unless you have an old deal because you haven't looked at updating after your contract expired).
Mine, which costs AUS$59 per, is 200GB per with unlimited upload and VOIP (free national calls) thrown in. I reckon that I use about 50GB download per month @ 1.2mb/s and I just leave the upload on @ 50mb/s. I would cheerfully set the upload higher but it seems to interfere with VOIP/browsing... I think it's to do with handshaking... anyway it still adds up fast believe it or not.
If I went over they would reduce my speed with an option to buy more GBs cheaply enough if I wanted... NO FINES.
But the line is crap down here, The Southern Vales. They were looking to putting in an national fibre-to-the-home but with the new myopic ideologues in charge who knows...?
EDIT: I meant 50kb/s
----------------------------------------------------------------
Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
DSE VZ300-
Zilog Z80 CPU, 32KB RAM (16K+16K cartridge), video processor 6847, 2KB video RAM, 16 colours (text mode), 5.25" FDD
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. January 2014 @ 18:46
|
Senior Member
|
17. January 2014 @ 03:34 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Jemborg:
Originally posted by Mysttic:
Originally posted by xboxdvl2:
here in australia most isp don't actually charge for overuse they just reduce your speed until next payment.
That must be nice as here in Canada and I know some ISPs in US they actually charge $1.00-1.50 / GB over your limit but let you keep the same speed. Personally I'd accept a slower connection if it meant no overage fees, so long as I could browse for the news and what not.
Dunno if xboxdvl2 is talking about mobile broadband but usually the limits are usually set quite high for landline in Oz (unless you have an old deal because you haven't looked at updating after your contract expired).
Mine, which costs AUS$59 per, is 200GB per with unlimited upload and VOIP (free national calls) thrown in. I reckon that I use about 50GB download per month @ 1.2mb/s and I just leave the upload on @ 50mb/s. I would cheerfully set the upload higher but it seems to interfere with VOIP/browsing... I think it's to do with handshaking... anyway it still adds up fast believe it or not.
If I went over they would reduce my speed with an option to buy more GBs cheaply enough if I wanted... NO FINES.
But the line is crap down here, The Southern Vales. They were looking to putting in an national fibre-to-the-home but with the new myopic ideologues in charge who knows...?
----------------------------------------------------------------
pretty sure your on same plan as me jemborg.If you manage to reach the 200gbs (mines got as high as 80gbs in a month) supposedy they will limit your speeds to 1mbps until the end of the month, getting speeds of average 8mbps usually.
Old providers use to limit people to 256mbs after 50gbs (until end of month)some still do which is why they are losing customers.
I havn't actually used mobile broadband but from what i've seen it cost a lot for less usage and does run out quickly.
hmmm big ears and what hes gonna do with fibre internet, I don't actually know what hes gonna do but he seems to talk a lot which big ideas and not actually do anything.
I do love stirring aussies on the internet with a joke "tell tony abbott to move his head hes blocking your wifi signal
custom built gaming pc from early 2010,ps2 with 15 games all original,ps3 500gbs with 5 games all original,yamaha amp and 5.1channel surround sound speakers,46inch sony lcd smart tv.
|
|
adre02
Member
1 product review
|
17. January 2014 @ 07:53 |
Link to this message
|
I cannot see throttling last very long with the advent of newer streaming technologies. We go well over 70gb per month on a lower usage...If i am doing an graphic design projects then it goes just above that.
It would take a pretty high cap tbh especially with the 4k crave coming on and newer streaming movie services.
This is superman
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Senior Member
|
17. January 2014 @ 12:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
I should mention I get better than average speed (a floppy a second!) but I get a lot of dropouts and shite VOIP. I would be happy for the reliability of fibre.
On track: I'm glad the above business is being challenged.
Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
DSE VZ300-
Zilog Z80 CPU, 32KB RAM (16K+16K cartridge), video processor 6847, 2KB video RAM, 16 colours (text mode), 5.25" FDD
|
