Ro - you always try to latch onto one issue and beat it to death as if it is the most important one. Obfuscation of the bigger issues? Netflix etc. is the least of my and many others’ worries. Where there is a gatekeeper that can regulate what goes in and out, and the gatekeeper benefits from the gatekeeping activity, you bet there will be very active gatekeeping.
I think we’ve all seen how fast things can change @evergreen5 .
WILL ISPs have the power to block websites? Did they not have that ability under NN rules and now they will? Or is that not true?
“Today at 4:11 pm edited 4:11PM
^How can there be “extraordinary new powers” when the regulations were only in place for two years? The sky is falling all the way back to 2015.”
What was the state of the art in 2015? A 2 year period is eternity in tech world.
My point is simply that removal of the regulations does not bestow any new legal powers that didn’t exist prior to 2015.
The technology issue is a separate matter. Technology changes rapidly, but I find it hard to believe that they were unable, technologically, to block websites back in the “old” days.
There was waaay less motivation to do so in 2015 as a lot of real competition emerged only in the last 2 years, and the phrase “fake news” did not even exist back then.
I don’t think this will affect the average consumer much. If you go back before the 2015 FCC ruling or even further back prior to the 2010 rules, there wasn’t much in the way of content blocking. The most egregious example was BitTorrent blocking or delays by some ISPs, not the widespread censorship and fear-mongering people are being scared with.
“What if You Couldn’t Access This Page?”
“To taste a future without net neutrality, try browsing the web in Beijing. China’s internet, provided through telecom giants aligned with the Communist Party, is a digital dystopia, filtered by the vast censorship apparatus known as China’s Great Firewall. Some sites load with soul-withering slowness, or not at all. Others appear instantly. Content vanishes without warning or explanation. The culprit is rarely knowable. A faulty Wi-Fi router? A neighborhood power failure? Commercial sabotage? A clampdown on political dissent? To most Chinese netizens, the reason matters little. They simply gravitate to the few sites that aren’t slowed or blocked entirely: the Chinese counterparts of Facebook, Google, and Twitter. But these Chinese platforms come with heavy government surveillance and censorship by corporate and party apparatchiks. For the Communist Party and its commercial allies, this is win-win, cementing respective monopolies on political markets and consumer power.”
I’m looking forward to the lawsuit a bunch of states are now joining NY in filing.
Kleptocracy.
@BunsenBurner OH you’re talking about roethlisburger. I thought you were responding to me with “Ro.” I thought 29 was referring to me. Oops.
Carry on.
This change will initially be used by ISPs to excercise unlimited control over the internet in terms of access and speed, so it’s about being able to reach as deeply into as many pockets as possible, whether those pockets be attached to individuals or corporations. The internet is as essential to business and commerce as it is to individuals. The ability to communicate, access knowledge, attain goods and services, and conduct business on virtually every level, becomes more internet dependent by the day. Who really believes the big telecom companies won’t abuse the absolute power that’s just been handed them? You, roethlisburger?
This is bad enough, but I fear the lack of a free and open internet will ultimately be used to exercise iron fisted political and ideological control over the American populace, to silence dissenting viewpoints, and stymie the ability to mobilize for social and political change. Corrupt politicians are already more than happy to disregard the views of the majority of citizens in favor of having their palms greased by the rich and powerful. How many congresspersons and senators “owe” the telecommunications giants for palm-greasings past, just as they do the donor class their big Christmas tax cuts?
The will break the design of the internet ; the one where each user pays for transport of their traffic. Ultimately I think it will backfire ; what will prevent Netflix, Google, or some future content provider from deploying their own internet service, especially if the FCC opens up more spectrum for fixed wireless service? T-mobile just bought a TV streaming company, ATT owns one, so I don’t think it is too far away.
Much voice and data traffic is already running on network sublet from larger providers or carriers. Netflix won’t likely build an entire data transport network from scratch. It took Sprint years. Each carrier has a proportion of services provided by others, transparent to end users.
So the log jam can occur at many points, the chain being only as strong as it’s weakest (read: most determined to turn this to profit advantage) link.
It remains to be seen how this turns out and how different markets are affected.
But the principle seems to be: let the big dawgs get bigger, because they can. And someone doesn’t want to stop that or ameliorate it.
I’m way more worried about blocking content they don’t like. Something like so: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/us/27verizon.html
Eta: oops blog.
https://www.consumerreports.org/net-neutrality/end-of-net-neutrality-what-to-watch-for/ describes things that people may want to watch for.
I think it’s worth noting that Ajit Pai is a former Associate Attorney for—wait for it—Verizon Communications! What a surprise…
And current promoter for Hershey’s! ~O) 
Watch this… before your ISP blocks it:
http://www.bbc.com/news/av/42341736/what-is-net-neutrality-and-how-could-it-affect-you
It’s as if our water provider, instead of providing clean water for everyone, was now allowed to deliver pristine water at a specific, higher price AND have a price for barely drinkable muddy water, could stop your water from running at any point, letting it through but only a trickle so you can wash your hands but not shower… At will.
I used to wonder about the times of the Robber Barons, how people could accept what was going on. That’s what it feels like.
Nobody voted for this in 2016. Nobody (no state, no town, no citizen, not even a political party’s platform) asked for it. It feels like a corrupt decision - made against people, for giant corporations/monopolies.
The internet is necessary to work, to apply to college, to do anything. In fact, rural areas with poor internet service are at a disadvantage for business creation and sustainability.
Net neutrality is a founding principle of citizens’ internet access. While the current regulations are relatively recent, the concept of net neutrality isn’t.
Time to watch the German film Democracy which deals with Internet providers in the European Union and how lawmakers tried to prevent or push something similar.
Does anyone see the inconsistency of wanting identical treatment of internet traffic for all but different tax rates by income and circumstance ?