Your Universal Remote Control Center
RemoteCentral.com
Custom Installers' Lounge Forum - View Post
Previous section Next section Previous page Next page Up level
Up level
The following page was printed from RemoteCentral.com:

Login:
Pass:
 
 

Page 1 of 3
Topic:
Breaking: the FCC just released its plan to kill net neutrality
This thread has 41 replies. Displaying posts 1 through 15.
Post 1 made on Tuesday November 21, 2017 at 16:24
Ernie Gilman
Yes, That Ernie!
Joined:
Posts:
December 2001
30,104
Why hasn't this been a topic here for months and months?

The guys whose email I reproduce below always have their hands out for five bucks for the cause, but it's a damn good cause.

The simplest metaphor I've heard for a world without net neutrality is to think of telephone service. Imagine it would cost you more money to phone some people than to phone others. Of course, the low cost calls with be xfinity, Comcast and Fios customer service, while calls to friends and families will be expensive calls. Other calls would further be biased toward whoever can influence the governing body (the FCC) to slant the charges.


Here's what they sent out most recently:

Verizon-lawyer-turned-FCC-chairman Ajit Pai just released the final text of his plan to kill net neutrality, and it’s just as terrible as we thought it would be. [1]

Enough is enough. It’s time to protest and expose this corruption. Congress can still stop the FCC, but they’ll only act if there’s a massive public outcry right now.

Internet users are planning protests at Verizon stores across the country on December 7 to demand that Congress stop the FCC. Will you join us?

Verizon-lawyer-turned-FCC-chairman Ajit Pai just released the final text of his plan to kill net neutrality, and it’s just as terrible as we thought it would be. [1]

Enough is enough. It’s time to protest and expose this corruption. Congress can still stop the FCC, but they’ll only act if there’s a massive public outcry right now.

Internet users are planning protests at Verizon stores across the country on December 7 to demand that Congress stop the FCC. Will you join us?

In the middle of that text there's a TAKE ACTION button that will enable the draining of your wallet. It's a link to [Link: verizonprotests.com]
A good answer is easier with a clear question giving the make and model of everything.
"The biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." -- G. “Bernie” Shaw
Post 2 made on Tuesday November 21, 2017 at 20:03
amirm
Advanced Member
Joined:
Posts:
December 2008
780
What would we go after Verizon??? AT&T is the one that is currently trying to capitalize on that. And at any rate, how would protesting at Verizon change Trump/FCC mind???
Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital, http://madronadigital.com
Founder, Audio Science Review, http://audiosciencereview.com
Post 3 made on Tuesday November 21, 2017 at 22:59
buzz
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
May 2003
4,366
Write to your Congress person. Maybe a dollars and cents approach would work for Congress. When they vote your way, send a contribution. And, of course, don't forget to vote. I can't wait till the next election.
Post 4 made on Tuesday November 21, 2017 at 23:41
highfigh
Loyal Member
Joined:
Posts:
September 2004
8,311
On November 21, 2017 at 20:03, amirm said...
What would we go after Verizon??? AT&T is the one that is currently trying to capitalize on that. And at any rate, how would protesting at Verizon change Trump/FCC mind???

The head of the FCC worked for Verizon.

Trump wants the deal to be stopped- some sources show that he thinks it would kill competition and cost users too much, another states that he would only allow it if ATT spins off CNN, which we all know he hates.

Personally, I don't care how much he hates CNN, as long as this kind of deal is blocked.
My mechanic told me, "I couldn't repair your brakes, so I made your horn louder."
Post 5 made on Tuesday November 21, 2017 at 23:43
highfigh
Loyal Member
Joined:
Posts:
September 2004
8,311
On November 21, 2017 at 22:59, buzz said...
Write to your Congress person. Maybe a dollars and cents approach would work for Congress. When they vote your way, send a contribution. And, of course, don't forget to vote. I can't wait till the next election.

Personally, I think that if many members of Congress were to wake up with a gloved hand over their mouth and someone whispering that they need to change their ways, it would be a start.
My mechanic told me, "I couldn't repair your brakes, so I made your horn louder."
Post 6 made on Wednesday November 22, 2017 at 00:33
amirm
Advanced Member
Joined:
Posts:
December 2008
780
On November 21, 2017 at 23:41, highfigh said...
The head of the FCC worked for Verizon.

And he left back in 2012 and was appointed to the commission during Obama's presidency and unanimously approved for that position and recent one to Chairman by the senate.

If someone left your company and did something you want people to boycott your business five years later???

Trump wants the deal to be stopped- some sources show that he thinks it would kill competition and cost users too much, another states that he would only allow it if ATT spins off CNN, which we all know he hates.

Personally, I don't care how much he hates CNN, as long as this kind of deal is blocked.

You are talking about AT&T and Warner merger. That is not what is being discussed. AT&T is trying to bundle DirecTV streaming for data-free on their wireless service. So they are the ones asking for such de-regulation and benefit immediately. Verizon is not so situated and hence my comment about AT&T being the one to "go after" if there is somebody to go after.
Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital, http://madronadigital.com
Founder, Audio Science Review, http://audiosciencereview.com
OP | Post 7 made on Wednesday November 22, 2017 at 02:50
Ernie Gilman
Yes, That Ernie!
Joined:
Posts:
December 2001
30,104
Amir, can you explain what this means? I know, I know, I'm reading the words... but I cannot make sense of it:
On November 22, 2017 at 00:33, amirm said...
AT&T is trying to bundle DirecTV streaming for data-free on their wireless service.

What is "streaming for data-free"? The want to bundle DirecTV streaming... AS data? And free? On their wireless service, so they want to stream only to phones? Sorry, I just don't get it.

So they are the ones asking for such de-regulation and benefit immediately.

It's been said that the deregulation allows carriers to charge different rates for different sites. How does this benefit AT&T, since customers would likely reject being asked to pay more?

Here's another FLASH announcement. The scoop, as Lois Lane would have said:

The FCC just announced its plan to slash net neutrality rules, allowing ISPs like Verizon to block apps, slow websites, and charge fees to control what you see & do online. They vote December 14th. But if Congress gets enough calls, *they* can stop the FCC.

So... let's say AT&T really wants this. Does that mean that this description of the situation is wrong?
A good answer is easier with a clear question giving the make and model of everything.
"The biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." -- G. “Bernie” Shaw
Post 8 made on Wednesday November 22, 2017 at 08:48
thecapnredfish
Senior Member
Joined:
Posts:
February 2008
1,397
I may not agree with it. But it's coming and why should companies not be allowed? The network is built and maintained by someone(companies). It's not a right, not a public street. We got hooked and they want control and profits. Should I be able to tap into a gas pipeline, pay 40 bucks a month and take what I want? Should ISP's allow companies like Netflix, Amazon and others to burden the network and rake in profits? I've been telling people when they cut the cord to save money you will pay more for internet in the long run. ISP's have to make money.

Statements above may not be well thought out. A quick response was developed while seated on my throne dropping thoughts of government actions.
Post 9 made on Wednesday November 22, 2017 at 09:00
Archibald "Harry" Tuttle
Advanced Member
Joined:
Posts:
May 2009
972
On November 21, 2017 at 23:43, highfigh said...
Personally, I think that if many members of Congress were to wake up with a gloved hand over their mouth and someone whispering that they need to change their ways, it would be a start.

I think it would probably take a severed horse head under the blankets in their bed to get the point across to that bunch of numbskulls.
I came into this game for the action, the excitement. Go anywhere, travel light, get in, get out, wherever there's AV trouble, a man alone.
OP | Post 10 made on Wednesday November 22, 2017 at 09:45
Ernie Gilman
Yes, That Ernie!
Joined:
Posts:
December 2001
30,104
On November 22, 2017 at 08:48, thecapnredfish said...
I may not agree with it. But it's coming and why should companies not be allowed? The network is built and maintained by someone(companies). It's not a right, not a public street.

This argument would keep mail from being delivered outside of small towns. It would keep the entire rural US from having electricity.

And yes, I believe that internet is now as necessary as electricity. And electric companies who have to deliver power to the outiest outpost seem to be doing all right.
A good answer is easier with a clear question giving the make and model of everything.
"The biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." -- G. “Bernie” Shaw
Post 11 made on Wednesday November 22, 2017 at 10:14
highfigh
Loyal Member
Joined:
Posts:
September 2004
8,311
On November 22, 2017 at 00:33, amirm said...
And he left back in 2012 and was appointed to the commission during Obama's presidency and unanimously approved for that position and recent one to Chairman by the senate.

If someone left your company and did something you want people to boycott your business five years later???

You are talking about AT&T and Warner merger. That is not what is being discussed. AT&T is trying to bundle DirecTV streaming for data-free on their wireless service. So they are the ones asking for such de-regulation and benefit immediately. Verizon is not so situated and hence my comment about AT&T being the one to "go after" if there is somebody to go after.

Hey! I was only offering a possible reason for people hating him!

You know how people attach blame for things done in the past, right?

And this thread is about net neutrality, which would allow control over who gets to connect with what, for how long and at what cost. Once someone is in control of the internet, it will be time to create a new one and that would be damned difficult.

What don't you get? ATT doesn't install copper wire, anymore. If they can get people to convert to only streaming content, they won't need set top boxes and won't need satellites, except to relay the signal. More simple installation (internet only) saves money. They're already replacing copper with fiber and it's only a matter of time until they're using fiber to the building for everything. They have been trying to get people to use DirecTV, rather than U-Verse and they ARE the 800 pound gorilla, in many areas. If they add T-W, they'll be the 2000 pound gorilla.
My mechanic told me, "I couldn't repair your brakes, so I made your horn louder."
Post 12 made on Wednesday November 22, 2017 at 10:15
highfigh
Loyal Member
Joined:
Posts:
September 2004
8,311
On November 22, 2017 at 09:00, Archibald "Harry" Tuttle said...
I think it would probably take a severed horse head under the blankets in their bed to get the point across to that bunch of numbskulls.

If that works, fine.
My mechanic told me, "I couldn't repair your brakes, so I made your horn louder."
Post 13 made on Wednesday November 22, 2017 at 10:20
Sean@iTank
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
August 2011
193
On November 22, 2017 at 08:48, thecapnredfish said...
I may not agree with it. But it's coming and why should companies not be allowed? The network is built and maintained by someone(companies). It's not a right, not a public street. We got hooked and they want control and profits. Should I be able to tap into a gas pipeline, pay 40 bucks a month and take what I want? Should ISP's allow companies like Netflix, Amazon and others to burden the network and rake in profits? I've been telling people when they cut the cord to save money you will pay more for internet in the long run. ISP's have to make money.

Statements above may not be well thought out. A quick response was developed while seated on my throne dropping thoughts of government actions.

This a not a relevant analogy to the net neutrality debate. There is no one company that owns the entire Internet. They have their networks, and peer with other networks, including their competitors. Without that relationship the Internet doesn't work.

Likewise, to use your comparison to gas pipeline: ISPs already charge different rates for a variety of throughput levels (i.e., download/upload speeds) and bandwidth (data use). There is nothing in the current net neutrality rules that prevents them from doing that. They are not required to provide unlimited bandwidth to customers at no additional cost.

What they are NOT allowed to do under current net neutrality rules is prioritize certain types of traffic or charge customers or sites at different rates for access to particular sites or particular traffic. For example, they can't charge you an additional fee to access Facebook or Netflix. Repealing the standing net neutrality rules WOULD allow ISPs to charge these sites and YOU additional fees to access certain sites or BLOCK THEIR ACCESS ENTIRELY. Essentially, they will be able to charge YOU more money without providing ANY additional benefit whatsoever.

Moreover, many of the largest ISPs--Comcast in particular--also have their own media companies and content delivery networks (e.g. Comcast owns NBC/Universal). Repealing net neutrality rules will allow them to prioritize their own content traffic while charging you additional fees to access a competitors site (e.g. Netflix, Hulu, etc.). Or they could block them altogether. This is monopolistic on its face. It will also put a choke hold on the explosion of innovation that open access to the Internet has created over the last three decades.

There is really no debate to be had as a consumer/citizen. This is a simple money/power grab by large ISPs to be able to charge you more for less, as well as the authority to decide what and whose content you should or should not be allowed to access.
Post 14 made on Wednesday November 22, 2017 at 10:56
thecapnredfish
Senior Member
Joined:
Posts:
February 2008
1,397
Sean
I understand your first paragraph and I'd not go into that detail. You don't think they all, or near all wish to do this.
Paragraph three would take care of paragraph two. Full control.
All these tech companies want control and your money. Even this Alexa device has people yelling in their house. Stop Alexa, stop Alexa(laughed at a customer recently)I'm sure they are working on ways to squeeze more out of you in the future. Just wait. Getting you hooked.
Post 15 made on Wednesday November 22, 2017 at 11:13
osiris
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
November 2004
442
On November 22, 2017 at 10:56, thecapnredfish said...
Sean
I understand your first paragraph and I'd not go into that detail. You don't think they all, or near all wish to do this.
Paragraph three would take care of paragraph two. Full control.
All these tech companies want control and your money. Even this Alexa device has people yelling in their house. Stop Alexa, stop Alexa(laughed at a customer recently)I'm sure they are working on ways to squeeze more out of you in the future. Just wait. Getting you hooked.

What?
Page 1 of 3


Jump to


Protected Feature Before you can reply to a message...
You must first register for a Remote Central user account - it's fast and free! Or, if you already have an account, please login now.

Please read the following: Unsolicited commercial advertisements are absolutely not permitted on this forum. Other private buy & sell messages should be posted to our Marketplace. For information on how to advertise your service or product click here. Remote Central reserves the right to remove or modify any post that is deemed inappropriate.

Hosting Services by ipHouse