No, they just want to be able to add caps.
I'm now a fierce believer that ISP's should simply be dumb pipes only. Thankfully, my ISP, CCI, doesn't have caps (yet). I used 450 gigs last month due to 4K streaming.
Last edited:
Net Neutrality Explained
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 196
- Views 25K
No, they just want to be able to add caps.
I'm now a fierce believer that ISP's should simply be dumb pipes only. Thankfully, my ISP, CCI, doesn't have caps (yet). I used 450 gigs last month due to 4K streaming.
Agreed too. But in a standard router config you're using their DNS server (ISP) and using Google (8.8.8.8, 8.8.4.4) bypasses your ISP.
I think.... Anyway then Google stores your requests for some finite time. I guess there has to be a big brother out there someplace.
And here my ISP has several plans. The 10 meg plan only lets you use 50 gigs before you're capped flat on your face at 1mbps until the next billing cycle. That's caught a lot of folks here cussing them because a few Netflix movies (or leaving Youtube running) eats up their bandwidth. I've done a bit of consultation work for people. Which comes to....
The 50 meg plan. 500 gigs of data. Once again, flat on your face 1mbps when you eat that up. Not hard to do when people think simply going faster cures the headaches for 15 bucks more a month.
So they have the 100 meg plan, recently 1000. 100 megs gets you unlimited data but is 30 samolians more than the base plan a month.
There's really no reason to slap such a drastic data drop once you've capped. 1 meg barely lets you load a web page.
But, like a dog. They do it because they can.
Those rules aren't based on what type of data you're consuming though. They're just blanket caps.
Irony: It's Opposite Day At The FCC: Rejects All Its Own Legal Arguments Against Net Neutrality To Claim It Can Be The Internet Speech Police
disclaimer: I am not endorsing any viewpoint here other than NN would and did work better than what we have now.
disclaimer: I am not endorsing any viewpoint here other than NN would and did work better than what we have now.
Sounds like they are saying they can't regulate transmission, but can regulate content... which sounds backwards.
Reminds me of how the Federal Trade Commission was policing childrens' content on YouTube...
I think the Data Cap exemption for provider owned content needs to go as that is clearly unfair monopoly.
A good deal of content is actually being bought up and held behind paywalls, so unfair transmissions isn't as big a deal right now. You want to stream HBO Max content... you've really got just one option. You want to stream Champions League, one option.
The FCC needs to also stop the conglomeration of stations. It has caused nothing but problems for consumers and distributors! In fact, we need to break them up, but that might be too soon after the FCC allowed them to buy up stations.
A good deal of content is actually being bought up and held behind paywalls, so unfair transmissions isn't as big a deal right now. You want to stream HBO Max content... you've really got just one option. You want to stream Champions League, one option.
The FCC needs to also stop the conglomeration of stations. It has caused nothing but problems for consumers and distributors! In fact, we need to break them up, but that might be too soon after the FCC allowed them to buy up stations.
If the Standard Oil and AT&T monopolies have taught us anything, it's that corporate monopolies are terrible and need to be broken up...
I agree. I'm a capitalist through and through, but it needs to be regulated.
FCC chairman Ajit Pai out, net neutrality back in
Opinion: As expected, Trump appointee Ajit Pai, who destroyed net neutrality, is leaving office. He leaves behind a legacy of higher internet prices and broken net neutrality. Things can only get better for the internet from here.
www.zdnet.com
FCC chairman Ajit Pai out, net neutrality back in
Opinion: As expected, Trump appointee Ajit Pai, who destroyed net neutrality, is leaving office. He leaves behind a legacy of higher internet prices and broken net neutrality. Things can only get better for the internet from here.
For a piece so loaded with one man's personal opinion, it's unfortunate that it isn't labeled as such. Not saying I agree or disagree with him, but that "article" is riddled with opinionated personal language.
I have no idea why this is allowed. It is clearly a breach of abusing a monopoly.article said:
Pai really managed to mess one thing up. We need a standard, and we need to stick with it. We can't be jerking along like a kid learning to drive a stick shift. We need rules, we need to stick with them, unless there is a very compelling reason to modify them. The Pandemic proved that High Speed internet is an absolutely necessary utility in the 21st century. If we didn't have it, this pandemic would be much much different both medically, economically, educationally, and socially. It is time to start regulating it as such.
It does say it's opinion. It's right there under the headline:
Opinion: As expected, Trump appointee Ajit Pai, who destroyed net neutrality, is leaving office. He leaves behind a legacy of higher internet prices and broken net neutrality. Things can only get better for the internet from here.
Last edited:
