Coulter.2315 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 Wouldn't the free market take effect? If a certain company starts doing all the bad stuff won't you all just switch your provider? I don't really have a dog in this fight but if a company screws its customers it will find it has less customers, you'll get more inovation and experimentation with payment/service models with less regulation and the market will make the best of those popular and profitable (which encourages everyone to keep doing better). I would rather everyone gave the reduction of regulation a chance and if it turns out to be a shit show vote in a government promising to regulate (yay you live in a democracy). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haishao.6851 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > And yet websites like google, facebook and youtube are already black balling contributors for content that they don't agree with politically. What's the difference? The difference is that they are websites and, thanks to net neutrality, you can go to any other websites or your choice without restrictions. If ISP block some websites, you cannot go to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coulter.2315 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > > @Chickenooble.5014 said: > > An ISP has to maintain an infrastructure and constantly make improvements. Why do you guys think it's a bad thing to pay more if you're using more bandwidth than everyone else? > > It goes beyond charging more for more bandwidth. They will have the power to block or slow down sites or services which they disagree with politically, or because the site/service in question doesn't pay them kickbacks, or because they are supporting a competitor of the site, or because they feel like it. For example, what if your ISP contracts with Google, and slows down or blocks services from Google competitors? What if your ISP is run by the same corporation that owns Hulu, and they decide to slow down Netflix? What if your ISP is run by a CEO or organization with strong religious leanings, and blocks any content that conflicts with their religious beliefs? What if the ISP is run by political right- or left-wingers who will block news websites whose coverage leans the 'wrong' way? > > And, yeah, you can sit there and say it's not going to happen, but if it isn't going to happen, why legalize it? Why spend millions lobbying Congress to legalize it? > The answer to every question you asked is *change ISP!* That is literally how capitalism works, you choose what you want and the market punishes/rewards behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarcShriek.5829 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 Shouldn't people that use more bandwidth pay for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarcShriek.5829 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @Haishao.6851 said: > > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > > > And yet websites like google, facebook and youtube are already black balling contributors for content that they don't agree with politically. What's the difference? > > The difference is that they are websites and, thanks to net neutrality, you can go to any other websites or your choice without restrictions. > If ISP block some websites, you cannot go to them. Oh really, what website provides youtube services with even close to the amount of traffic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genesis.5169 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > Shouldn't people that use more bandwidth pay for it? No internet is now a public utility do you believe people should pay extra for electricity if your using it to use your pc, instead of your refrigerator? Do you really thing compartmentalizing the internet is a good thing? I swear to god ever time i hear thing it annoys me please look past 2 steps before you make assumptions because electrical utilities and phone companies were doing this before we rained them in. Charging more for business calls and to heat your home via electricity etc. Companies left up to there own devices do not protect the consumer the milk them why can't people understand that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarcShriek.5829 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @Genesis.5169 said: > > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > > Shouldn't people that use more bandwidth pay for it? > > No internet is now a public utility do you believe people should pay extra for electricity if your using it to use your pc, instead of your refrigerator? Do you really thing compartmentalizing the internet is a good thing? I swear to god ever time i hear thing it annoys me please look past 2 steps before you make assumptions because electrical utilities and phone companies were doing this before we rained them in. > > Charging more for business calls and to heat your home via electricity etc. Companies left up to there own devices do not protect the consumer the milk them why can't people understand that. Guess what, people that use more electricity pay more for it. That's why people in Arizona have larger electric bills in the summer than in the winter. If you use too much water you pay a premium for the extra water. Please don't swear to god. It's blasphemous and offensive. We reigned in phone companies? Have you seen your cell phone bill lately? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coulter.2315 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @Genesis.5169 said: > > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > > Shouldn't people that use more bandwidth pay for it? > > No internet is now a public utility do you believe people should pay extra for electricity if your using it to use your pc, instead of your refrigerator? Do you really thing compartmentalizing the internet is a good thing? I swear to god ever time i hear thing it annoys me please look past 2 steps before you make assumptions because electrical utilities and phone companies were doing this before we rained them in. > > Charging more for business calls and to heat your home via electricity etc. Companies left up to there own devices do not protect the consumer the milk them why can't people understand that. You do pay more for using more electricity.. Right? I certainly do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambent.6375 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > > > > @Chickenooble.5014 said: > > > An ISP has to maintain an infrastructure and constantly make improvements. Why do you guys think it's a bad thing to pay more if you're using more bandwidth than everyone else? > > > > It goes beyond charging more for more bandwidth. They will have the power to block or slow down sites or services which they disagree with politically, or because the site/service in question doesn't pay them kickbacks, or because they are supporting a competitor of the site, or because they feel like it. For example, what if your ISP contracts with Google, and slows down or blocks services from Google competitors? What if your ISP is run by the same corporation that owns Hulu, and they decide to slow down Netflix? What if your ISP is run by a CEO or organization with strong religious leanings, and blocks any content that conflicts with their religious beliefs? What if the ISP is run by political right- or left-wingers who will block news websites whose coverage leans the 'wrong' way? > > > > And, yeah, you can sit there and say it's not going to happen, but if it isn't going to happen, why legalize it? Why spend millions lobbying Congress to legalize it? > > > > And yet websites like google, facebook and youtube are already black balling contributors for content that they don't agree with politically. What's the difference? You can easily go to another site to obtain that content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genesis.5169 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @Coulter.2315 said: > > @Genesis.5169 said: > > > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > > > Shouldn't people that use more bandwidth pay for it? > > > > No internet is now a public utility do you believe people should pay extra for electricity if your using it to use your pc, instead of your refrigerator? Do you really thing compartmentalizing the internet is a good thing? I swear to god ever time i hear thing it annoys me please look past 2 steps before you make assumptions because electrical utilities and phone companies were doing this before we rained them in. > > > > Charging more for business calls and to heat your home via electricity etc. Companies left up to there own devices do not protect the consumer the milk them why can't people understand that. > > You do pay more for using more electricity.. Right? I certainly do. I pay the same rate for all the things i use though, i don't pay extra for charging my phone, thats what net neutrality is about. > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > > @Genesis.5169 said: > > > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > > > Shouldn't people that use more bandwidth pay for it? > > > > No internet is now a public utility do you believe people should pay extra for electricity if your using it to use your pc, instead of your refrigerator? Do you really thing compartmentalizing the internet is a good thing? I swear to god ever time i hear thing it annoys me please look past 2 steps before you make assumptions because electrical utilities and phone companies were doing this before we rained them in. > > > > Charging more for business calls and to heat your home via electricity etc. Companies left up to there own devices do not protect the consumer the milk them why can't people understand that. > > Guess what, people that use more electricity pay more for it. That's why people in Arizona have larger electric bills in the summer than in the winter. If you use too much water you pay a premium for the extra water. > Please don't swear to god. It's blasphemous and offensive. > > We reigned in phone companies? Have you seen your cell phone bill lately? Yes but you pay the same rate for all of the appliances in your house, imagine having to pay extra to access different parts of the internet, a lot people comment on things they know nothing about in the business world your electricity ulilties are currently governed by the same laws that the internet is currently what they want to do is make it so they can charge your different rates in different places on the net. Please understand what the law is before you comment on things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelgar.7214 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @Coulter.2315 said: > > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > > > > @Chickenooble.5014 said: > > > An ISP has to maintain an infrastructure and constantly make improvements. Why do you guys think it's a bad thing to pay more if you're using more bandwidth than everyone else? > > > > It goes beyond charging more for more bandwidth. They will have the power to block or slow down sites or services which they disagree with politically, or because the site/service in question doesn't pay them kickbacks, or because they are supporting a competitor of the site, or because they feel like it. For example, what if your ISP contracts with Google, and slows down or blocks services from Google competitors? What if your ISP is run by the same corporation that owns Hulu, and they decide to slow down Netflix? What if your ISP is run by a CEO or organization with strong religious leanings, and blocks any content that conflicts with their religious beliefs? What if the ISP is run by political right- or left-wingers who will block news websites whose coverage leans the 'wrong' way? > > > > And, yeah, you can sit there and say it's not going to happen, but if it isn't going to happen, why legalize it? Why spend millions lobbying Congress to legalize it? > > > > The answer to every question you asked is *change ISP!* That is literally how capitalism works, you choose what you want and the market punishes/rewards behaviour. No, it isn't. Choice in regard to broadband isn't close to universal in the United States. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cragga the Eighty Third.60 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @Coulter.2315 said: > > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > > > > @Chickenooble.5014 said: > > > An ISP has to maintain an infrastructure and constantly make improvements. Why do you guys think it's a bad thing to pay more if you're using more bandwidth than everyone else? > > > > It goes beyond charging more for more bandwidth. They will have the power to block or slow down sites or services which they disagree with politically, or because the site/service in question doesn't pay them kickbacks, or because they are supporting a competitor of the site, or because they feel like it. For example, what if your ISP contracts with Google, and slows down or blocks services from Google competitors? What if your ISP is run by the same corporation that owns Hulu, and they decide to slow down Netflix? What if your ISP is run by a CEO or organization with strong religious leanings, and blocks any content that conflicts with their religious beliefs? What if the ISP is run by political right- or left-wingers who will block news websites whose coverage leans the 'wrong' way? > > > > And, yeah, you can sit there and say it's not going to happen, but if it isn't going to happen, why legalize it? Why spend millions lobbying Congress to legalize it? > > > > The answer to every question you asked is *change ISP!* That is literally how capitalism works, you choose what you want and the market punishes/rewards behaviour. You live in a big city, don't you? Guess what? Most of the country does not HAVE more than one ISP provider available. There is no second choice. There is nobody to switch to. Where I live, I can get Time Warner cable internet. Or I can go online and sign up with some other company, who will sell me Time Warner internet with their own company's charges added on. Or I can go through the local phone company, who will route me through Time Warner internet. So many choices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarcShriek.5829 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > > @Genesis.5169 said: > > > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > > > Shouldn't people that use more bandwidth pay for it? > > > > No internet is now a public utility do you believe people should pay extra for electricity if your using it to use your pc, instead of your refrigerator? Do you really thing compartmentalizing the internet is a good thing? I swear to god ever time i hear thing it annoys me please look past 2 steps before you make assumptions because electrical utilities and phone companies were doing this before we rained them in. > > > > Charging more for business calls and to heat your home via electricity etc. Companies left up to there own devices do not protect the consumer the milk them why can't people understand that. > > Guess what, people that use more electricity pay more for it. That's why people in Arizona have larger electric bills in the summer than in the winter. If you use too much water you pay a premium for the extra water. > Please don't swear to god. It's blasphemous and offensive. > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > > > > > > @Chickenooble.5014 said: > > > > An ISP has to maintain an infrastructure and constantly make improvements. Why do you guys think it's a bad thing to pay more if you're using more bandwidth than everyone else? > > > > > > It goes beyond charging more for more bandwidth. They will have the power to block or slow down sites or services which they disagree with politically, or because the site/service in question doesn't pay them kickbacks, or because they are supporting a competitor of the site, or because they feel like it. For example, what if your ISP contracts with Google, and slows down or blocks services from Google competitors? What if your ISP is run by the same corporation that owns Hulu, and they decide to slow down Netflix? What if your ISP is run by a CEO or organization with strong religious leanings, and blocks any content that conflicts with their religious beliefs? What if the ISP is run by political right- or left-wingers who will block news websites whose coverage leans the 'wrong' way? > > > > > > And, yeah, you can sit there and say it's not going to happen, but if it isn't going to happen, why legalize it? Why spend millions lobbying Congress to legalize it? > > > > > > > The answer to every question you asked is *change ISP!* That is literally how capitalism works, you choose what you want and the market punishes/rewards behaviour. > > You live in a big city, don't you? Guess what? Most of the country does not HAVE more than one ISP provider available. There is no second choice. There is nobody to switch to. While most of the country may not have a choice, most of the population does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coulter.2315 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @Genesis.5169 said: > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > @Genesis.5169 said: > > > > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > > > > Shouldn't people that use more bandwidth pay for it? > > > > > > No internet is now a public utility do you believe people should pay extra for electricity if your using it to use your pc, instead of your refrigerator? Do you really thing compartmentalizing the internet is a good thing? I swear to god ever time i hear thing it annoys me please look past 2 steps before you make assumptions because electrical utilities and phone companies were doing this before we rained them in. > > > > > > Charging more for business calls and to heat your home via electricity etc. Companies left up to there own devices do not protect the consumer the milk them why can't people understand that. > > > > You do pay more for using more electricity.. Right? I certainly do. > > I pay the same rate for all the things i use though, i don't pay extra for charging my phone, thats what net neutrality is about. Even if the rate of pay is the same the rate of consumption varies with appliance as well as the overall consumption varies with how much you use. So you will pay more if you use a TV, phone, fridge over a TV, fridge and some TVs will consume more than other TVs, there is a whole market in energy saving appliances for literally this reason. Your bill isn't itemised by appliance but it is varying with respect to the appliances you use, even if you and the company don't know. I would drop the electricity comparison it doesn't make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo G.4501 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > > > > > > @Chickenooble.5014 said: > > > > An ISP has to maintain an infrastructure and constantly make improvements. Why do you guys think it's a bad thing to pay more if you're using more bandwidth than everyone else? > > > > > > It goes beyond charging more for more bandwidth. They will have the power to block or slow down sites or services which they disagree with politically, or because the site/service in question doesn't pay them kickbacks, or because they are supporting a competitor of the site, or because they feel like it. For example, what if your ISP contracts with Google, and slows down or blocks services from Google competitors? What if your ISP is run by the same corporation that owns Hulu, and they decide to slow down Netflix? What if your ISP is run by a CEO or organization with strong religious leanings, and blocks any content that conflicts with their religious beliefs? What if the ISP is run by political right- or left-wingers who will block news websites whose coverage leans the 'wrong' way? > > > > > > And, yeah, you can sit there and say it's not going to happen, but if it isn't going to happen, why legalize it? Why spend millions lobbying Congress to legalize it? > > > > > > > The answer to every question you asked is *change ISP!* That is literally how capitalism works, you choose what you want and the market punishes/rewards behaviour. > > You live in a big city, don't you? Guess what? Most of the country does not HAVE more than one ISP provider available. There is no second choice. There is nobody to switch to. > Where I live, I can get Time Warner cable internet. Or I can go online and sign up with some other company, who will sell me Time Warner internet with their own company's charges added on. Or I can go through the local phone company, who will route me through Time Warner internet. So many choices. Technically, the other option is to go with a satellite internet cable/internet service. Although I never used satellite internet, I did used to install it and I would recommend staying away from sat internet if you want to stream it play online games. It has improved over the years but it is still not in the ballpark of cable broadband not as reliable as radio cell towers... I'd only recommend for rural. Just a PSA for those on the outside looking in on this issue. In non-metro areas, there is either the 1 standard broadband option or the suboptimal (and possibly more costly) option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egrimm Van Horstmann.7921 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > Shouldn't people that use more bandwidth pay for it? So each person using this service is already paying for data usage, Comcast then decides to charge large content providers a premium not to throttle their content. Isn't Comcast charging double for their services? This is where Comcast isn't doing anything other than punishing large content providers. The customers downloading the content have already paid for the data usage. So in essence they want their cake and eat it too. Second Monopolies are the opposite of the free market and right now Cable companies operate much like the Baby Bells of the phone company of the past. There is no competition. Basically even though Netflix streams content it's not like they put a million streams of every movie, no your particular stream starts when you connect to their server before this time no extra content is running on Comcast. It's basic 101 how computers and servers operate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genesis.5169 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @Coulter.2315 said: > > @Genesis.5169 said: > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > @Genesis.5169 said: > > > > > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > > > > > Shouldn't people that use more bandwidth pay for it? > > > > > > > > No internet is now a public utility do you believe people should pay extra for electricity if your using it to use your pc, instead of your refrigerator? Do you really thing compartmentalizing the internet is a good thing? I swear to god ever time i hear thing it annoys me please look past 2 steps before you make assumptions because electrical utilities and phone companies were doing this before we rained them in. > > > > > > > > Charging more for business calls and to heat your home via electricity etc. Companies left up to there own devices do not protect the consumer the milk them why can't people understand that. > > > > > > You do pay more for using more electricity.. Right? I certainly do. > > > > I pay the same rate for all the things i use though, i don't pay extra for charging my phone, thats what net neutrality is about. > > Even if the rate of pay is the same the rate of consumption varies with appliance as well as the overall consumption varies with how much you use. So you will pay more if you use a TV, phone, fridge over a TV, fridge and some TVs will consume more than other TVs, there is a whole market in energy saving appliances for literally this reason. > > Your bill isn't itemised by appliance but it is varying with respect to the appliances you use, even if you and the company don't know. I would drop the electricity comparison it doesn't make sense. > I didn't bring it up some one else did i was just destroying the argument, and you may not get an itemized bill but the rate of the bill you pay is the same for all appliances some use less and some use more but your paying by the wat not by the item. What net neutrality puts at risk is the fact that you may have to pay more not for the bandwidth but just to have access to certain locations of the net. Why can't people understand this isn't only about data, THIS IS NOT ABOUT DATA ITS ABOUT ACCESS FFS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coulter.2315 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > > > > > > @Chickenooble.5014 said: > > > > An ISP has to maintain an infrastructure and constantly make improvements. Why do you guys think it's a bad thing to pay more if you're using more bandwidth than everyone else? > > > > > > It goes beyond charging more for more bandwidth. They will have the power to block or slow down sites or services which they disagree with politically, or because the site/service in question doesn't pay them kickbacks, or because they are supporting a competitor of the site, or because they feel like it. For example, what if your ISP contracts with Google, and slows down or blocks services from Google competitors? What if your ISP is run by the same corporation that owns Hulu, and they decide to slow down Netflix? What if your ISP is run by a CEO or organization with strong religious leanings, and blocks any content that conflicts with their religious beliefs? What if the ISP is run by political right- or left-wingers who will block news websites whose coverage leans the 'wrong' way? > > > > > > And, yeah, you can sit there and say it's not going to happen, but if it isn't going to happen, why legalize it? Why spend millions lobbying Congress to legalize it? > > > > > > > The answer to every question you asked is *change ISP!* That is literally how capitalism works, you choose what you want and the market punishes/rewards behaviour. > > You live in a big city, don't you? Guess what? Most of the country does not HAVE more than one ISP provider available. There is no second choice. There is nobody to switch to. > Where I live, I can get Time Warner cable internet. Or I can go online and sign up with some other company, who will sell me Time Warner internet with their own company's charges added on. Or I can go through the local phone company, who will route me through Time Warner internet. So many choices. Well say Time Warner decides to screw its customers, it suddenly loses all its customers in the cities (likely crippling it), then your patch becomes ripe fruit for another company to start competing for. Competion is what drives better products, I can understand you feel vulnerable but companies don't get rich and stay rich by producing something people don't want to buy - good quality internet is something people want to buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coulter.2315 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @Genesis.5169 said: > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > @Genesis.5169 said: > > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > @Genesis.5169 said: > > > > > > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > > > > > > Shouldn't people that use more bandwidth pay for it? > > > > > > > > > > No internet is now a public utility do you believe people should pay extra for electricity if your using it to use your pc, instead of your refrigerator? Do you really thing compartmentalizing the internet is a good thing? I swear to god ever time i hear thing it annoys me please look past 2 steps before you make assumptions because electrical utilities and phone companies were doing this before we rained them in. > > > > > > > > > > Charging more for business calls and to heat your home via electricity etc. Companies left up to there own devices do not protect the consumer the milk them why can't people understand that. > > > > > > > > You do pay more for using more electricity.. Right? I certainly do. > > > > > > I pay the same rate for all the things i use though, i don't pay extra for charging my phone, thats what net neutrality is about. > > > > Even if the rate of pay is the same the rate of consumption varies with appliance as well as the overall consumption varies with how much you use. So you will pay more if you use a TV, phone, fridge over a TV, fridge and some TVs will consume more than other TVs, there is a whole market in energy saving appliances for literally this reason. > > > > Your bill isn't itemised by appliance but it is varying with respect to the appliances you use, even if you and the company don't know. I would drop the electricity comparison it doesn't make sense. > > > > I didn't bring it up some one else did i was just destroying the argument, and you may not get an itemized bill but the rate of the bill you pay is the same for all appliances some use less and some use more but your paying by the wat not by the item. Each item has a different consumption of watts, your kWh varies with each appliance. You are paying different rates as a function of your used appliances. If you switch all your lightbulbs to energy saving lightbulbs you are using the same amount of appliance but your rate of pay per hour and consumption per hour has altered. Your worry about parts of the internet being cut off by companies is reasonable, you might however find that quality full access internet is a product people want to buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurelian Omenkind.2470 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @Genesis.5169 said: > > Charging more for business calls and to heat your home via electricity etc. Companies left up to there own devices do not protect the consumer the milk them why can't people understand that. Monopolies certainly do milk the public without regulations to stop them. A free market keeps competitive companies in check against price gouging so vast regulations aren’t so necessary. Look at US cell carriers. Constant competition between Sprint and T-Mobile have driven prices down for consumers to the point that even Verizon and AT&T had to respond by offering cheaper (though not competitively cheap) rates due to churn (subscriber flux). The market controls itself. If Sprint and TMO went ahead with the merger, the lack of competition would have given them room to raise rates again and everyone would have gotten more expensive. Thankfully that's not gonna happen now. If you have more than one ISP in your area, you have the option to switch and pay someone else for internet service that doesn’t block or throttle the service(s) you want. The best way to keep companies in check is to let them know you’re paying their competition instead. They’ll wise up and change because no CEO wants to lose his fat paycheck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genesis.5169 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @Coulter.2315 said: > > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > > > > > > > > @Chickenooble.5014 said: > > > > > An ISP has to maintain an infrastructure and constantly make improvements. Why do you guys think it's a bad thing to pay more if you're using more bandwidth than everyone else? > > > > > > > > It goes beyond charging more for more bandwidth. They will have the power to block or slow down sites or services which they disagree with politically, or because the site/service in question doesn't pay them kickbacks, or because they are supporting a competitor of the site, or because they feel like it. For example, what if your ISP contracts with Google, and slows down or blocks services from Google competitors? What if your ISP is run by the same corporation that owns Hulu, and they decide to slow down Netflix? What if your ISP is run by a CEO or organization with strong religious leanings, and blocks any content that conflicts with their religious beliefs? What if the ISP is run by political right- or left-wingers who will block news websites whose coverage leans the 'wrong' way? > > > > > > > > And, yeah, you can sit there and say it's not going to happen, but if it isn't going to happen, why legalize it? Why spend millions lobbying Congress to legalize it? > > > > > > > > > > The answer to every question you asked is *change ISP!* That is literally how capitalism works, you choose what you want and the market punishes/rewards behaviour. > > > > You live in a big city, don't you? Guess what? Most of the country does not HAVE more than one ISP provider available. There is no second choice. There is nobody to switch to. > > Where I live, I can get Time Warner cable internet. Or I can go online and sign up with some other company, who will sell me Time Warner internet with their own company's charges added on. Or I can go through the local phone company, who will route me through Time Warner internet. So many choices. > > Well say Time Warner decides to screw its customers, it suddenly loses all its customers in the cities (likely crippling it), then your patch becomes ripe fruit for another company to start competing for. Competion is what drives better products, I can understand you feel vulnerable but companies don't get rich and stay rich by producing something people don't want to buy - good quality internet is something people want to buy. Yep, all that competition making banking practices better, companies out in silicone valley like google who surely can be beaten by the free market. But lets just focus this on video games for now. I remember when video games were given to you in full and dlc were actually full blown expansions like shivering islands for The Elder Scrolls : Oblivion. I remember when everyone hated day 1 dlc and people like you said just don't buy it and companies will follow because of competition. I remember when we found out that capcom was hiding dlc ON THE DISC right after that and people still do it. I remember when people said EA will die out on its own for bad business because competition. I remember when video games weren't 10hours long and 60$. And thats just video games. To understand the world you need to read up on game theory what you advocate does not work if the winners have already monopolized the market and incase of isps there are 3 big ones whats stoping them from all agreeing to have the same polices to fuck everyone like banks do, and tons of other companies do? The abilities for people to think critically and look at history is absurdly low now a days, all those monopolies we had in the gilded age weren't killed by competition they were killed by the government coming in and breaking them up. > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > > @Genesis.5169 said: > > > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > > > Shouldn't people that use more bandwidth pay for it? > > > > No internet is now a public utility do you believe people should pay extra for electricity if your using it to use your pc, instead of your refrigerator? Do you really thing compartmentalizing the internet is a good thing? I swear to god ever time i hear thing it annoys me please look past 2 steps before you make assumptions because electrical utilities and phone companies were doing this before we rained them in. > > > > Charging more for business calls and to heat your home via electricity etc. Companies left up to there own devices do not protect the consumer the milk them why can't people understand that. > > Guess what, people that use more electricity pay more for it. That's why people in Arizona have larger electric bills in the summer than in the winter. If you use too much water you pay a premium for the extra water. > Please don't swear to god. It's blasphemous and offensive. > > We reigned in phone companies? Have you seen your cell phone bill lately? > @"Aurelian Omenkind.2470" said: > > @Genesis.5169 said: > > > > Charging more for business calls and to heat your home via electricity etc. Companies left up to there own devices do not protect the consumer the milk them why can't people understand that. > > Monopolies certainly do milk the public without regulations to stop them. A free market keeps competitive companies in check against price gouging so vast regulations aren’t so necessary. Look at US cell carriers. Constant competition between Sprint and T-Mobile have driven prices down for consumers to the point that even Verizon and AT&T had to respond by offering cheaper (though not competitively cheap) rates due to churn (subscriber flux). The market controls itself. If Sprint and TMO went ahead with the merger, the lack of competition would have given them room to raise rates again and everyone would have gotten more expensive. Thankfully that's not gonna happen now. > > If you have more than one ISP in your area, you have the option to switch and pay someone else for internet service that doesn’t block or throttle the service(s) you want. The best way to keep companies in check is to let them know you’re paying their competition instead. They’ll wise up and change because no CEO wants to lose his fat paycheck. I don't know how to tell you this but it just isn't true there't no single event in history that supports it, free market capitalism gets you what happened in Chili. I don't know how to explain it any better i'm a student of political science (major) and economics (minor). Just take a look at history and you;ll see how "free markets" usually pan out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo G.4501 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @Coulter.2315 said: > > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > > > > > > > > @Chickenooble.5014 said: > > > > > An ISP has to maintain an infrastructure and constantly make improvements. Why do you guys think it's a bad thing to pay more if you're using more bandwidth than everyone else? > > > > > > > > It goes beyond charging more for more bandwidth. They will have the power to block or slow down sites or services which they disagree with politically, or because the site/service in question doesn't pay them kickbacks, or because they are supporting a competitor of the site, or because they feel like it. For example, what if your ISP contracts with Google, and slows down or blocks services from Google competitors? What if your ISP is run by the same corporation that owns Hulu, and they decide to slow down Netflix? What if your ISP is run by a CEO or organization with strong religious leanings, and blocks any content that conflicts with their religious beliefs? What if the ISP is run by political right- or left-wingers who will block news websites whose coverage leans the 'wrong' way? > > > > > > > > And, yeah, you can sit there and say it's not going to happen, but if it isn't going to happen, why legalize it? Why spend millions lobbying Congress to legalize it? > > > > > > > > > > The answer to every question you asked is *change ISP!* That is literally how capitalism works, you choose what you want and the market punishes/rewards behaviour. > > > > You live in a big city, don't you? Guess what? Most of the country does not HAVE more than one ISP provider available. There is no second choice. There is nobody to switch to. > > Where I live, I can get Time Warner cable internet. Or I can go online and sign up with some other company, who will sell me Time Warner internet with their own company's charges added on. Or I can go through the local phone company, who will route me through Time Warner internet. So many choices. > > Well say Time Warner decides to screw its customers, it suddenly loses all its customers in the cities (likely crippling it), then your patch becomes ripe fruit for another company to start competing for. Competion is what drives better products, I can understand you feel vulnerable but companies don't get rich and stay rich by producing something people don't want to buy - good quality internet is something people want to buy. So you think the majority would just swap or not use internet/cable? The reality is, even if the competitors of an area push their competition out of business in a city, that company just sells their assets and merge in that region, cutting the whole completion factor out. Now you have a city with 1 less competitors (the company isn't out of business, they just cease operations in that region) and you're back to square one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie.1698 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 https://www.recode.net/2017/6/20/15839626/disparity-between-urban-rural-internet-access-major-economies "But in absolute figures, it’s still noteworthy just how many people that comprises: that’s 62 million Americans in urban centers and 16 million in rural locations who can’t access fast internet." I am one of those people..I have only ONE choice and that is satellite internet access at 129.00 a month, 14.99 equipment fee a month, capped at the highest level I can go and that is 50GB per month. The FCC was given funds by the United States to use to give to internet service providers to bridge this gap, none have done so or are listing build out dates further than five years out, in other words, they took the money, never provided the service they took the money for. https://www.fcc.gov/general/connect-america-fund-caf , this move by the FCC puts our chances of ever getting high speed affordable internet service down to 0. We have lobbied, fought, sued, pushed, prodded....none of them used the millions they were given to do anything about what they were supposed to do. Now, with deregulation and the FCC not keeping to its standards of what constitutes "high speed internet" any of these companies, all of them really, will keep this money they were given and never, ever, come to our areas as they initially promised when they took all that money. No regulation of what they do is what this means to us, which means we have NO CHOICE at all, and won't for the foreseeable future. Before, after regulations were passed, they had to show where they used the money they were given. Net neutrality acts like this affect so much more than regulating high internet usage, the "fine" print so to speak is something that unless you have no choice but to sell your house and move away to get broadband internet over 20mps download speeds, 50GB capped a month service, you wont' realize is even in there because you won't read the entire thing. Ajit Varadaraj Pai, sold us down the river without a single thought, are we worth less than a corporations profits? No podcasts, no online learning because we don't have a fast enough connection to maintain connection to a virtual learning environment, no downloading of books, movies, lectures of any kind as it burns through the little data we have? But them...of course deregulating huge companies is much more important, their billions must mean THEY get to have a choice, but we do not. 140 families on my street, we signed a petition, we have fought, sued, argued, we get no where. We can't just up and sell our houses and move away. But this..it means they have won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OriOri.8724 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @Coulter.2315 said: > > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > > > > > > > > @Chickenooble.5014 said: > > > > > An ISP has to maintain an infrastructure and constantly make improvements. Why do you guys think it's a bad thing to pay more if you're using more bandwidth than everyone else? > > > > > > > > It goes beyond charging more for more bandwidth. They will have the power to block or slow down sites or services which they disagree with politically, or because the site/service in question doesn't pay them kickbacks, or because they are supporting a competitor of the site, or because they feel like it. For example, what if your ISP contracts with Google, and slows down or blocks services from Google competitors? What if your ISP is run by the same corporation that owns Hulu, and they decide to slow down Netflix? What if your ISP is run by a CEO or organization with strong religious leanings, and blocks any content that conflicts with their religious beliefs? What if the ISP is run by political right- or left-wingers who will block news websites whose coverage leans the 'wrong' way? > > > > > > > > And, yeah, you can sit there and say it's not going to happen, but if it isn't going to happen, why legalize it? Why spend millions lobbying Congress to legalize it? > > > > > > > > > > The answer to every question you asked is *change ISP!* That is literally how capitalism works, you choose what you want and the market punishes/rewards behaviour. > > > > You live in a big city, don't you? Guess what? Most of the country does not HAVE more than one ISP provider available. There is no second choice. There is nobody to switch to. > > Where I live, I can get Time Warner cable internet. Or I can go online and sign up with some other company, who will sell me Time Warner internet with their own company's charges added on. Or I can go through the local phone company, who will route me through Time Warner internet. So many choices. > > Well say Time Warner decides to screw its customers, it suddenly loses all its customers in the cities (likely crippling it), then your patch becomes ripe fruit for another company to start competing for. Competion is what drives better products, I can understand you feel vulnerable but companies don't get rich and stay rich by producing something people don't want to buy - good quality internet is something people want to buy. That's how it works with a commodity. Internet is no longer a commodity in the US. You cannot just decide to quit using the internet because you don't want to support the only internet provider in your area. And even if you are delusional to think you can get away with that, it would have to be everyone in the city and nearbby agreeing to the same thing. Stop pretending like american's have any real choice when choosing their internet provider, because the majority don't. And of those that do, most of them only have 2 choices, and those 2 companies are usually in agreement with each other to not provide real competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coulter.2315 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 > @Genesis.5169 said: > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > @"Cragga the Eighty Third.6015" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @Chickenooble.5014 said: > > > > > > An ISP has to maintain an infrastructure and constantly make improvements. Why do you guys think it's a bad thing to pay more if you're using more bandwidth than everyone else? > > > > > > > > > > It goes beyond charging more for more bandwidth. They will have the power to block or slow down sites or services which they disagree with politically, or because the site/service in question doesn't pay them kickbacks, or because they are supporting a competitor of the site, or because they feel like it. For example, what if your ISP contracts with Google, and slows down or blocks services from Google competitors? What if your ISP is run by the same corporation that owns Hulu, and they decide to slow down Netflix? What if your ISP is run by a CEO or organization with strong religious leanings, and blocks any content that conflicts with their religious beliefs? What if the ISP is run by political right- or left-wingers who will block news websites whose coverage leans the 'wrong' way? > > > > > > > > > > And, yeah, you can sit there and say it's not going to happen, but if it isn't going to happen, why legalize it? Why spend millions lobbying Congress to legalize it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > The answer to every question you asked is *change ISP!* That is literally how capitalism works, you choose what you want and the market punishes/rewards behaviour. > > > > > > You live in a big city, don't you? Guess what? Most of the country does not HAVE more than one ISP provider available. There is no second choice. There is nobody to switch to. > > > Where I live, I can get Time Warner cable internet. Or I can go online and sign up with some other company, who will sell me Time Warner internet with their own company's charges added on. Or I can go through the local phone company, who will route me through Time Warner internet. So many choices. > > > > Well say Time Warner decides to screw its customers, it suddenly loses all its customers in the cities (likely crippling it), then your patch becomes ripe fruit for another company to start competing for. Competion is what drives better products, I can understand you feel vulnerable but companies don't get rich and stay rich by producing something people don't want to buy - good quality internet is something people want to buy. > > Yep, all that competition making banking practices better, companies out in silicone valley like google who surely can be beaten by the free market. > > But lets just focus this on video games for now. > > I remember when video games were given to you in full and dlc were actually full blown expansions like shivering islands for The Elder Scrolls : Oblivion. > I remember when everyone hated day 1 dlc and people like you said just don't buy it and companies will follow because of competition. > I remember when we found out that capcom was hiding dlc ON THE DISC right after that and people still do it. > I remember when people said EA will die out on its own for bad business because competition. > I remember when video games weren't 10hours long and 60$. > And thats just video games. > > > To understand the world you need to read up on game theory what you advocate does not work if the winners have already monopolized the market and incase of isps there are 3 big ones whats stoping them from all agreeing to have the same polices to kitten everyone like banks do, and tons of other companies do? The abilities for people to think critically and look at history is absurdly low now a days, all those monopolies we had in the gilded age weren't killed by competition they were killed by the government coming in and breaking them up. > > > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > > > @Genesis.5169 said: > > > > @DarcShriek.5829 said: > > > > Shouldn't people that use more bandwidth pay for it? > > > > > > No internet is now a public utility do you believe people should pay extra for electricity if your using it to use your pc, instead of your refrigerator? Do you really thing compartmentalizing the internet is a good thing? I swear to god ever time i hear thing it annoys me please look past 2 steps before you make assumptions because electrical utilities and phone companies were doing this before we rained them in. > > > > > > Charging more for business calls and to heat your home via electricity etc. Companies left up to there own devices do not protect the consumer the milk them why can't people understand that. > > > > Guess what, people that use more electricity pay more for it. That's why people in Arizona have larger electric bills in the summer than in the winter. If you use too much water you pay a premium for the extra water. > > Please don't swear to god. It's blasphemous and offensive. > > > > We reigned in phone companies? Have you seen your cell phone bill lately? > > > > @"Aurelian Omenkind.2470" said: > > > @Genesis.5169 said: > > > > > > Charging more for business calls and to heat your home via electricity etc. Companies left up to there own devices do not protect the consumer the milk them why can't people understand that. > > > > Monopolies certainly do milk the public without regulations to stop them. A free market keeps competitive companies in check against price gouging so vast regulations aren’t so necessary. Look at US cell carriers. Constant competition between Sprint and T-Mobile have driven prices down for consumers to the point that even Verizon and AT&T had to respond by offering cheaper (though not competitively cheap) rates due to churn (subscriber flux). The market controls itself. If Sprint and TMO went ahead with the merger, the lack of competition would have given them room to raise rates again and everyone would have gotten more expensive. Thankfully that's not gonna happen now. > > > > If you have more than one ISP in your area, you have the option to switch and pay someone else for internet service that doesn’t block or throttle the service(s) you want. The best way to keep companies in check is to let them know you’re paying their competition instead. They’ll wise up and change because no CEO wants to lose his fat paycheck. > > I don't know how to tell you this but it just isn't true there't no single event in history that supports it, free market capitalism gets you what happened in Chili. I don't know how to explain it any better i'm a student of political science (major) and economics (minor). Just take a look at history and you;ll see how "free markets" usually pan out. You realise Chile is the most stable and prosperous country in Latin America, right? Setting aside Pinochet (dictatorships are always bad) it is superior to every other country around it in income per capita, freedom, lack of murder, competitiveness and standard of living. I'm not sure saying "free market capitalism gets you what happened in Chile" is really helping your point or are you pretending dictatorship is a consequence of free market capitalism? Because that would be embarassingly stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts