As long as the Congress refuses to enact actual legislation the net neutrality issue will swing wildly depending on who is in the Whitehouse. Obama ordered it, then Trump repealed it, all without any action by the Congress. And so it will go without legislation. So instead of expressing your opinion to the FCC you should be hammering your representatives for action. And then watch them try to slip in security back door amendments while they’re at it.
Sorry it is not fast enough for you, It will be a slow death, you will hardly notice at first then one day certain websites seem sluggish while the big guns will be lighting fast.
People are still on this? Wow... get over it. The internet is fine the way it is. The worries that these statists talk about have never happened and likely won’t. It would be bad for business... #JustThink
This issue was SO overblown when it was originally overturned, that it's hard to take anyone seriously who is having a coronary over it all over again now. Websites like this one will "slow down" while the big guns are blazing down the internet superhighway? Please. Anyone buying that nonsense needs a reality check.
OK, just submitted my FCC response and suggest all others do the same to overturn 17-108 as it violates the 1996 Telecommunications Act and its predecessor the 1934 Communications Act.
I love how you told everyone not to think and simply do as they are told by you.
Me? Personally, I put the government takeover of the US internet by reclassifying if as a Title II communications service one more bleak moments of the Obama administration.
I do, unlike you, think each person should be able to think for themselves.
Ajit Pai is the most corrupt chair in the history of the FCC, and that's saying something. He's a complete toady for the big carriers and had to be forced by a court to do his actual job.
Sorry it is not fast enough for you, It will be a slow death, you will hardly notice at first then one day certain websites seem sluggish while the big guns will be lighting fast.
Under “net neutrality” only the big guns will win though. All ISPs under “net neutrality” would have to go through a bunch of red tape if they want to expand and foster new innovations. Whom do you think will be able to cut through the red tape faster, if at all?Thats right Verizon, AT&T, etc., not your smaller ISPs. With more regulation just comes more crony capitalism. There’s a reason why Google, Facebook, etc. SUPPORT “net neutrality” and it isn’t because they want to help the little guys.
I hate it when politicians give laws like this these names. It draws public support, but most of the public are idiots and don’t actually read what the law will do and the ramifications they bring.
You a right, because many only listen to the news stations they love that are controlled by the friends of those in power. It puts them in an echo chamber so they are confused about what is really happening. Net Neutrality did exactly what it was supposed to do, and that is a problem for the greedy. We already pay a lot for access to the Internet every month and get suckered into unlimited plans that are not unlimited. What was happening is Warner and Comcast started to create secondary tiers, throttling the speed of downloads unless the provider of the download also paid them under a separate contract.
They were creating a platform by which they would double dip. Once they previous administration caught on and put a stop to it the industry came out with letters promising they wouldn’t do what they were already doing.
I worked for a cable company that was definitely watching to see if they could follow the trend. Then when the practice came to light they released a vague letter that kind of said the wouldn’t do it, but not really
People are still on this? Wow... get over it. The internet is fine the way it is. The worries that these statists talk about have never happened and likely won’t. It would be bad for business... #JustThink
Well, the argument of “whatever-it-is is fine the way it currently is” is in college sequence the killer of any disruptive innovation. On the there hand, some developments creep in slowly and hence almost without notice. Like the famous lobster story: put it to hot water and it will try to escape. Slowly turn up the heat and it just stays until it’s too late. If you look back at how many inconveniences and annoyances are being taken for granted which was not like that many years ago: internet ads, spam phone calls, just to name two examples, they all built up slowly until a strong reaction happens. The balance to be struck in this case here is about being preventive to this kind of “slow death” while at the same time not blocking innovation.
As usual, things are not black and white, and I’m not sure thee is sufficient data available publicly to take the one right fact based decision.
Mr. Pai came to the FCC from Verizon and has been on a mission to give the telecom/ISP lobby their wish list starting with net neutrality. He is not your friend regardless of your political viewpoint.
Simply stated, net neutrality is equal access for both those who provide content- like Apple Insider - and consumers who view it. By the way, both the providers and consumers already pay ISPs for internet access.
A free and open internet needs for there to be equal access to the whole internet both to serve for a fair commercial market and for an open exchange of ideas among the public. The huge companies we all know like Amazon, Google, Facebook, Netflix and such were able to become what they are in part because of an online environment where your content and service was the determining factor in your success- not a rigged internet where their sites were not hobbled by a second or third tier online connection.
There is also a reasonable concern about a fair an open internet that allows for the free exchange of ideas. Despite the flame wars that get outsized attention, most online commenters are reasonable and not offensive.
Landline ISPs are a natural monopoly due to the expense and complexity of the build out and upkeep of the connections. Very few people have a choice regarding broadband landline internet connections. Wireless is not really a competition due to the low data caps imposed upon wireless networks and the common problems with congestion. As such, there is a compelling need fro some level of government oversight to make sure ISPs to not abuse their market position.
Thanks for taking your time to inform everyone however there are AI readers that think any regulations are a bad and they won't be persuaded.
Ideology over reality -- it drives both the far left and the far right these days.
Net Neutrality was always a scam by the Feds to control what you see and do on the internet. My costs are less and my internet speeds are faster since it’s repeal. Thank you Chairman Pai.
Whether you like him or loath him, at least Pai has actual domain experience in the position that he’s been appointed to. He probably even knows what WWW stands for. Shocking and rare in a herd of flunkies whose singular qualification for their appointment is blind loyalty and allegiance to their master. As far as public comments are concerned, why waste your time? Only one opinion matters and it’s already been rendered.
Under “net neutrality” only the big guns will win though. All ISPs under “net neutrality” would have to go through a bunch of red tape if they want to expand and foster new innovations.
Do you work for Verizon or AT&T, because only an industry shill could possibly believe this. The only "innovations" that net neutrality would inhibit are attempts by the ISPs to jack up rates and restrict data; things they *should* have to go through red tape to do!
Comments
Me? Personally, I put the government takeover of the US internet by reclassifying if as a Title II communications service one more bleak moments of the Obama administration.
I do, unlike you, think each person should be able to think for themselves.
Ideology over reality -- it drives both the far left and the far right these days.
Yep. Doing pretty good actually.