Who, exactly, are these "Freeloaders" you keep talking about? I don't know of anybody "stealing" internet. I pay for the speed I want, just as I'm sure everybody on this board does, too.
Bad news for net neutrality, Netflix and streaming services...
- Thread starter comfortably_numb
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 38
- Views 4K
Who, exactly, are these "Freeloaders" you keep talking about? I don't know of anybody "stealing" internet. I pay for the speed I want, just as I'm sure everybody on this board does, too.
Yea "Freeloaders" that's crazy saying that. Everyone pays and over pays.
Time Warner here promotes no caps. They promote the higher speeds. If they promote it they should back that up.
I think you and I see this the same.
Sent from my LG-H901 using the SatelliteGuys app!
The biggest freeloader on this site is none other than this man here! How dare he run a website and expect to run on Comcast/Cox/ATT pipes for free.
No no no..they want to charge extra to those who need more bandwidth..he pays,an Internet provider
Sent from my SM-G920V using the SatelliteGuys app!
Need more bandwidth? It sounds like they oversold the bandwidth available to their consumers. This isn't as if this is flow through traffic. This bandwidth is being received by Comcast internet subscribers. If Comcast can't provide the service they are selling to their customers, they are committing fraud.
I don't care if I pay Netflix or the ISP more per month for the better streams, but I really shouldn't have to pay both.
Not to mention the other ways we pay for "free" internet:
Not to mention the other ways we pay for "free" internet:
You pay for your end and Comcast asserts that Neflix needs to pay for their end too.
Yeah. Comcast wants to introduce a toll for the last five miles of a stream. YEARG MATEY!!!!! THIS HERE STREAM... ERR WHALE IS POPULAR. WE SHOULD SPEAR IT AND GET A CUT!
I believe that the discussion is about how "data" is charged. Comcast wants to charge for "data" at different rates depending upon the source.
In the US, we already pay A LOT (as much as five times) more for a lot less bandwidth compared to many other countries, including ones you might not consider "developed" due to government-sanctioned and abbeted tel-co monopolies at the local level. Ending Net Neutrality is just one more way the emerging corporate autocracy is paving the way to further increase their profit margins at the expense of working class Americans.
Do you have evidence to support this?
Comcast zero-rating their own content is perhaps covered by what they charge for the content. I could see a similar squawk about people who use AT&T or Verizon to access Comcast content.
As I understand it, Netflix forged an agreement with Comcast to upgrade Netflix' access to the Comcast network. Premium access requires a premium price.
Many of these "other countries" have state-run communications monopolies (as opposed to our regulated corporate monopolies). Are you suggesting that we should as well?
Or simply "regulate" the corporate monopolies in a way that allows competition.
Literally, monopoly and competition are mutually exclusive. A regulated monopoly attempts to enforce competitive profit margins without the complexity of supporting competition.
Perhaps you could cite some examples that support your claim. Note that these examples should serve more than just the upper classes/castes that live in large metropolitan areas.
That agreement was pre-net neutrality rules (look at the date in the article), and now violates those rules.
The rules prohibit throttling and paid prioritizing. These typically happen at the receiving end. The Netflix deal with Comcast is to provide better access for Netflix to Comcast's network and that's at the Netflix end of the pipe. I don't suppose it matters that Comcast should have relieved the problem by building a better pipe to handle what its customers were clamoring for.
The fact that the FCC didn't go after the deal before suggests that the agreement wasn't in violation.
The deal was made prior to the new FCC rules, therefore it was not a violation.
After the rules were made, the deal would not be allowed as it would then be a violation.
