Net Neutrality
 

Anyone have any thoughts about this:
FCC adopts historic Internet rules - Feb. 26, 2015

Time will tell but I suspect the "winner" here will be who the Winners usually are: corporations abd the US Gov't (same thing?). So be prepared to pay more regardless of which direction the money flows (corps or gov't).

Fun!

yup...thinking the FCC now has the authority to regulate content on the net like they do on radio and TV and just heard Verizon has or is selling fios so get ready for no money put into delivery

Yes - same shit different day! :thumbsup

your lawyers win either way :1orglaugh

nice to see the FCC is not as for-sale as congress. :2 cents:

Maybe not for sale but Obama appointed a cable industry lobbyist (Tom Wheeler) as the head of the FCC is pretty fucked up.

I foresee a LOT of regulations for the net. I have a bad feeling that the freedom of the internet is gonna be in trouble here.

Its not, eventually the little guys where going to be pushed out. This is stopped that. I know its Obama so its bad but this actually benefits small site owners and those who may have an idea they want to grow on the web.

Title II FCC Regulation will not give any price regulation so rest assured -- any cost incurred by your ISP by Net Neutrality regulation will be borne by the consumer.

If you operate a web business this is a good thing for you -- your content will be delivered with equal speed and quality to the consumer. XloveCam is a large video broadcaster so we will benefit by this but my personal ISP bill will go up faster ... Net Neutrality is a double-edged sword ...

I'm hoping along the same lines definitely. The FCC has a history of tightening it's tentacles around anything it controls, that's my only concern.

The FCC's proposed "Research Design for the Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs." study freaked a lot people out. I don't have a strong opinion either way yet, but found the following part of an article interesting:

Some of the suggested interview questions, appearing in Appendix A of the research design, include:

• What is the news philosophy of the station?
• How do you define critical information that the community needs?
• How much influence do reporters and anchors have in deciding which stories to cover?
• (To reporters) Have you ever suggested coverage of what you consider a story with critical information for your customers (viewers, listeners, readers) that was rejected by management?

"The Commission has no business probing the news media's editorial judgment and expertise, nor does it have any business in prescribing a set diet of 'critical information.' These goals are plainly inappropriate and are at bottom an incursion by the government into the constitutionally protected operations of the professional news media," the congressional letter stated.

Concerns were also raised by one of the FCC's own commissioners, Ajit Pai, in a Feb. 10 editorial for The Wall Street Journal.

Participation in the study is voluntary, Pai noted, but some media organizations may feel compelled to participate because they get their license from the FCC. SOURCE

Is your other nick Vendzilla or do we just have 2 crackpots here that manage to make every post about Obama?

Get ready for content regulations like the uk just got. Considering google just banned nudes on blogger...maybe they know something we don't?

They are probably just tired of all the time wasted on spammers..

As far as the FCC.. they aren't regulating content they are regulating the broadband industry... FCC regulates phones but there are still 1-900 sex lines..

It's about regulating the industry side of the ISP's not regulating content on the net..

I hope you're right. Of course in the future when Sweet Baby Jesus Obama is no longer President and we get some religious nut in the White House...things could change.

To me, that's the danger of letting the govt. get in control. They have been chomping at the bit to control the web since day one. Now they will.

It's so very weak and changes nothing. The criminal enterprises of the Internet got exactly what they wanted.

About the only thing that the trolls of the Internet went into a temporary panic worrying if they're going to still get to be assholes or not.

If it was up to me...
I would make it that EVERYONE wanting to subscribe to the Internet had to walk into a police station and show ID before signing up. Plus that person be 110% held financially and criminally responsible for anything and everything that his connection is used for.

I would also make ALL ISPs 110% responsible for the content on their sites and designate someone to be 110% criminally liable for any illegal usage.

I love how you far left libs will call anybody who disagrees with you a crackpot.
Everything Obama touches turns to shit, healthcare for example, what a nightmare he has created!

as an ISP/Broadband Provider and CLEC I'll throw my :2 cents: on this topic.

This is a interesting topic and here is why..

• They say to promote pole and conduit access for broadband providers, under title 2 section 224 it use to say "telecommunications companies" which means.. CLEC/ILECs wold gain access to public utilty poles/conduit
• FCC claimed interconnections.. where nos for example if netflix is peering with comcast and comcast is refusing to upgrade/add more interconnects netflix can now file a complaint with the FCC and the FCC can enforce action upon comcast to upgrade or face fines
• Consumor stand point.. No more data caps (i.e comcast 300gb limt and throttle) unlimited means unlimited. Though you will probably see plans witch to "10TB of data included" vs your Mbps flat rate you see today
• this ultimately opens up for additional taxes.. on the federal level to end users, however due to the internet freedom act federal and states cannot charge tax on internet service... so we will see how this works out
• ISPS with over 100k subscribers will have to mention their network in advertisements and disclose their packet loss

This will certainly be a interesting change of events in the future because of title 2

There is one issue, the FCC is allowing content filtering for "illegal content" you must of missed that one.