Net Neutrality explained so even a moron Democrat can understand it.

It comes down to real time supply and demand.

Democrats HATE that system.

Net Neutrality destroyed most all small, local, and cheap ISPs and the article shows how using actual numbers.

(Government artificially setting demand)

(Government fining ISPs if the fail to provide the supply for the artificial demand).


I pay for 1000MBS, and my computer won't even pull in 600MBS on a speed test.

That said I have constant streams going in HD on multiple devices, because I paid for 100MBS, so I'm going to be that whale of a customer.

Last Edited by Zedakah on 11/28/2017 12:28 PM

I pay for 300 and get 90.... sucks

oh wow are you really defending ISPs right to sell you something they dont actually have?

You more than likely pay for "Up to" 300. Not a guaranteed 300 all the time. You can certainly pay for and get a guaranteed speed, but it will cost a lot more than most residential customers are willing to pay.

Actually, I favor billing for actual usage, just like I pay for my electricity and water. That way, I'm not subsidizing my neighbor who has 4 kids and is constantly streaming video on multiple devices.

You call that a simple explanation? I somewhat followed it all being an Internet user and streamer, but that was far from a dumbed down explanation.

3. Charge everyone irrespective of their use of said new service -- or not. In other words I now have to be able to deliver the 2Gbps as an ISP but I can't charge on a differential basis for it based on who's making me purchase the additional capacity so I am now forced to charge everyone 25% more whether they use the new and innovative service or not. In this case you pay for your neighbor's decision to subscribe to Netflix. As a cable company I might get that from you in higher internet prices or higher cable TV prices but I have to get another $20/month from you somehow. If you're wondering why $200 cable+internet monthly bills are now rather common and it's damn hard to get both under $100 a month even with basic cable, maybe you will finally realize that you screwed yourself with all your insane screaming because this is why it happened.

Net Neutrality effectively forced the ISP to do #3 -- Hastings got his $200 stock price because you have been robbed whether you are a Netflix subscriber or not.

So I was thinking, all you need to do is a file transfer from a neighbor, video tape it with two cameras walk from one house to the other, and you can legally prove you are not getting the bandwidth you are paying for.


Those idiotic speed meter apps just measure minimal bytes from server to server and do not in any way indicate true bandwidth to the consumer.

The Statists won't touch this.

The ISP market isn't determined by supply and demand, but blatant price gouging.

If you actually read the article, the former CEO admits to blatant fraud, then justifies that fraud.

ISP's want the best of both worlds, they want the benefits of being a utility, without any of the liabilities of a utility.

This issue will cost Republicans big in 2018 and 2020.

You can paint it as a "left vs Right" issue, when in reality it is an issue between the brain dead and neurotically corrupt/psychopathic/sociopaths on one side, and every else that is tired of being ripped off by the carpetbagger ISP's on the other side.

I hope the ISP that is paying you to troll is nationalized.

I'm guessing Comcast pays trolls more than $3.50.

The reason there isn't more competition from smaller ISPs is Comcast and Verison will squash them like a bug. Using politcal assets, paid protestors and anyhing else they have to do to stay the only one.

Sounds like Netflix flushed out the lie.ISPs were.selling.

The lie they can provide 10mbs.for 50$ a month.

So let's repeal the.only bill the prevents censorship?

Lol.. I'm.supposed to care about ISPs caught in a lie.to make billions?

And trade content freedom?

Fuck off

No.

You're supposed to trust Government to look out for your best interests.

bumpitty-bump

[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

A cats take on it

Excellent take!

Trump and the Republicans reapealing Net Neutrality isn't going to be good for GLP or alternative thought.

Disappointed in your normally lucid thinking ET.

Elaborate.

Tell me how less government control is bad.

Then, read the articles posted, watch the videos, understand what it really is.

Everybody loves Netflix and Amazon, but they are sucking the life out of the internet, and they want all of us to pay for it.

Do you think it's fair if you watch 1 or 2 movies per month on netflix, while your neighbor with 4 kids is streaming disney channel 24/7, and you pay exactly the same rate for internet service?

ISPs' business model sounds an awful lot like banking and insurance.

Everything's fine as long as everyone doesn't ask for their bandwidth (money) at the same time...

Last Edited by Gimme Some Truth on 12/06/2017 09:36 AM

op is a moran

ISPs built their infrastructure in 1995, when internet traffic consisted of typed words on a static page, and full motion gifs took 20 minutes to load.

Now, everybody wants to pay the same price for internet and stream video on 8 devices at the same time, all day long.

Who should pay for that increased load? Consumer, or provider?

I know my electricity provider doesn't pay for my 2nd refrigerator in the garage to keep my beer cold.

Tell me why more Comcast or Verison (or whatever corp it is) control is better? They put the restrictions on to the competition, actually they will eventually eliminate the competition. That is anti capitalist, it's a kind of central control without recourse. Ever try to settle a dispute with Comcast? Think they are your friend? They are using your argument against you and you swallow the lie.

I currently have 4 cable/internet providers in my area. 6 or 10 would be better for me. The net neutrality regs are anti-capitalist.

You can go ahead and answer the questions I posed now.

Does your electricity provider tell you that you can't have a 2nd refrigerator?

When the ISPs contract something, contract law should apply. If they are misrepresenting their service, civil litigation should ensue. I have no problem with ISPs limiting their service with different plans and how fast they can go, but if you have already paid for something, like electricity through contract law, should be given what you and they agreed to. They should not have the ability to say if you can have the metaphorical 2nd refrigerator in the garage, only charge you more to after contractual agreements have been made and signed.

That way, when they say they want to charge me 50 dollars per month for 56k download speeds, I can tell them to go to hell...which is why they want this crony capitalistic solution.

Nope.

My electricity provider bills me per kilowatt/hour that I actually use. They don't give a fuck if I have 1 refrigerator or 10.

That's the way internet service should work, IMO.

I'm tired of subsidizing your porn streaming habits, when all I do is check the weather and read GLP.