Dr.Sack Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 Trump's FCC chairman Ajit Pai is in favor of dismantling net neutrality. How would you be impacted? www.technologyreview.com/s/603432/what-happens-if-net-neutrality-goes-away/amp/
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 Interesting topic. Not sure where I stand. Where does a place (board owner) stand on it? Would it help or hurt this place? Or not make a difference?
GG Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 Gee aother moron who doesn't know how to use the search function
Greg F Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 Interesting topic. Not sure where I stand. Where does a place (board owner) stand on it? Would it help or hurt this place? Or not make a difference? Not being able to prioritize traffic is about the dumbest thing you could propose. See VoIP.
IDBillzFan Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) Hey Nut...are you a leader of the meltdown movement, or just an eager participant? Because the threads you're starting are pure epic meltdown stuff. I mean truly epic. Keep it up. Sincerely, Trump/Pence 2020 Edited January 30, 2017 by LABillzFan
OCinBuffalo Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 This board is highly educated on net neutrality. I've helped see to that. So, they already know they won't be impacted. Or, if they are, they know that their ISP bills won't go up now, as they would have under net neutrality, because Google, Netflix et al had bought up most of the bandwidth on the cheap via bulk purchase, and crowded the rest of the market into paying inflated prices for what is left. It's supply and demand 101. There is a fixed supply of bandwidth today. While it is true that tomorrow, literally, there will be a small increase in supply, it will take years(a decade?) to be at a place where we have surplus bandwidth. The big software companies want to buy up most of the supply at reduced/fixed rates. The hardware companies want to charge them more, via preferential access, because if they don't, they have to charge their other customer's more to make up the difference...and...they also want to rent-seek on Google/Amazon/Netflix. Rent-seek: take a cut of Amazon's success, by charging a toll for all the bandwith they use. The hadware companies are absolutely not looking to charge a toll on OUR bandwidth.The accounting/billing alone makes it not worth doing(remember when paying for texting was done by the text? Yeah, the accounting staff and systems required to charge that way cost 5x what they were making instead of just doing unlimited texting) If anything they are in steep competition to get us to pay for set amounts of bandwidth, that most days we don't use. They are balancing price vs usage. They gamble that we won't use what we pay for, so, they can drop their price for more/the same, and compete against each other. That's why: when you call the cable company and B word, automagically, you seem to get higher speeds/less outages. They have the bandwidth on hand, it's just that you weren't demanding what you paid for, until you did. That's also why they are so willing to give you a free month as compensation. It's peanuts, as long as you keep paying the next month and beyond. The whole thing is merely business being business. There is no moral high ground here. What there is: a bunch of donors on both sides that are paying both sides to make this into a political issue, complete with a phony moral component. This is a lie.
DC Tom Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 This board is highly educated on net neutrality. I've GG and Azalin helped see to that. Jesus H !@#$ing Christ on a pony, you are full of yourself.
boyst Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 This board is highly educated on net neutrality. I've helped see to that. So, they already know they won't be impacted. Or, if they are, they know that their ISP bills won't go up now, as they would have under net neutrality, because Google, Netflix et al had bought up most of the bandwidth on the cheap via bulk purchase, and crowded the rest of the market into paying inflated prices for what is left. It's supply and demand 101. There is a fixed supply of bandwidth today. While it is true that tomorrow, literally, there will be a small increase in supply, it will take years(a decade?) to be at a place where we have surplus bandwidth. The big software companies want to buy up most of the supply at reduced/fixed rates. The hardware companies want to charge them more, via preferential access, because if they don't, they have to charge their other customer's more to make up the difference...and...they also want to rent-seek on Google/Amazon/Netflix. Rent-seek: take a cut of Amazon's success, by charging a toll for all the bandwith they use. The hadware companies are absolutely not looking to charge a toll on OUR bandwidth.The accounting/billing alone makes it not worth doing(remember when paying for texting was done by the text? Yeah, the accounting staff and systems required to charge that way cost 5x what they were making instead of just doing unlimited texting) If anything they are in steep competition to get us to pay for set amounts of bandwidth, that most days we don't use. They are balancing price vs usage. They gamble that we won't use what we pay for, so, they can drop their price for more/the same, and compete against each other. That's why: when you call the cable company and B word, automagically, you seem to get higher speeds/less outages. They have the bandwidth on hand, it's just that you weren't demanding what you paid for, until you did. That's also why they are so willing to give you a free month as compensation. It's peanuts, as long as you keep paying the next month and beyond. The whole thing is merely business being business. There is no moral high ground here. What there is: a bunch of donors on both sides that are paying both sides to make this into a political issue, complete with a phony moral component. This is a lie. the only part of net neutrality being voided out is that they can then channel information and make only certain sites accessible for free vs. a premium. we see it all the time and it won't be long before netflix does this. if you want access to your isp you can get google fiber 10mb for free. or 100mb for more. but if you go 10mb you can only go to certain sites they control. other sites they don't want you on will be slowed down. say vimeo instead of youtube. say time warner cuts a deal with verizon to allow a bundle to exist that when you use it you get a free streaming ability with your verizon that doesn't cost data - well, if time warner ever decided they wanted to cut out other news programming and information pieces to slant an agenda even more so than it spells doom there must be a level of protection for the media content that i cannot even believe i am saying. with "fake news" being swallowed up by the masses its a dangerous edge we could teeter on.
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 Gee aother moron who doesn't know how to use the search function Not sticking up for then... But the search function on this site has always been "cumbersome." IMO, not user friendly One thing that could be set up a little better... Especially member search. Not complaining though & understand it is the product of the board being utilized.
GG Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 Jesus H !@#$ing Christ on a pony, you are full of yourself. Never mind how momentarily wrong his treatise is. So if bandwidth is really at a fixed point now, why are ISPs willing to give away upper tiers for no extra cost to keep the subscriber?
OCinBuffalo Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) Jesus H !@#$ing Christ on a pony, you are full of yourself. Are you F'ing high? "I've helped" doesn't mean "I alone". Only somebody who has a particular derangement is blind to the difference in meaning. The truth is: I have written a ton on this issue. Unmitigated moron. Never mind how momentarily wrong his treatise is. So if bandwidth is really at a fixed point now, why are ISPs willing to give away upper tiers for no extra cost to keep the subscriber? Another unmitigated moron. Re-read what I said. It is at a fixed point. at ANY point in time. This does not mean that the point won't increase over time or, "literally, tomorrow"-->which is literally what I wrote. You still don't get it. They are willing to "give away" upper tiers...because they are just as willing to gamble that you don't use them fully. Now, surely a Wall Street person has the understanding of what the word "gamble" means, right? EDIT: And praytell, why does TIme Warner have "Business Class" which costs 2x what normal cable does? Why do they have tiers in their consumer offering at all? This is bandwidth. Clearly a concept you don't understand at all. Do you really think that if I am consuming bandwidth right now, and nobody else in my range is, that the cable company is going to slow me down, because I am getting higher speeds than I am supposed to get? If you do you are a complete buffoon. No. It is in the cable company's interest to clear my request as soon as possible, making room for potential new requests, as soon as possible. These "classes" that you are clinging to as some sort of point? They only exist as a way to get people to pay more...for what 4/5 times they are going to get anyway, given their usage. Edited January 31, 2017 by OCinBuffalo
DC Tom Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 Are you F'ing high? "I've helped" doesn't mean "I alone". Only somebody who has a particular derangement is blind to the difference in meaning. The truth is: I have written a ton on this issue. Unmitigated moron. Another unmitigated moron. Re-read what I said. It is at a fixed point. at ANY point in time. This does not mean that the point won't increase over time or, "literally, tomorrow"-->which is literally what I wrote. You still don't get it. They are willing to "give away" upper tiers...because they are just as willing to gamble that you don't use them fully. Now, surely a Wall Street person has the understanding of what the word "gamble" means, right? EDIT: And praytell, why does TIme Warner have "Business Class" which costs 2x what normal cable does? Why do they have tiers in their consumer offering at all? This is bandwidth. Clearly a concept you don't understand at all. Do you really think that if I am consuming bandwidth right now, and nobody else in my range is, that the cable company is going to slow me down, because I am getting higher speeds than I am supposed to get? If you do you are a complete buffoon. No. It is in the cable company's interest to clear my request as soon as possible, making room for potential new requests, as soon as possible. These "classes" that you are clinging to as some sort of point? They only exist as a way to get people to pay more...for what 4/5 times they are going to get anyway, given their usage. [This is an automated response.] Created by DC Tom-bot, beta version 0.61.
OCinBuffalo Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) [This is an automated response.] Created by DC Tom-bot, beta version 0.61. Yeah, and you are once again defeated by your own willingness to be fast, rather than accurate. Reading comprehension is important. Edited January 31, 2017 by OCinBuffalo
DC Tom Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 Yeah, and you are once again defeated by your own willingness to be fast, rather than accurate. Reading comprehension is important. [This is an automated response.] You're an idiot. Created by DC Tom-bot, beta version 0.61.
OCinBuffalo Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 the only part of net neutrality being voided out is that they can then channel information and make only certain sites accessible for free vs. a premium. we see it all the time and it won't be long before netflix does this. if you want access to your isp you can get google fiber 10mb for free. or 100mb for more. but if you go 10mb you can only go to certain sites they control. other sites they don't want you on will be slowed down. say vimeo instead of youtube. say time warner cuts a deal with verizon to allow a bundle to exist that when you use it you get a free streaming ability with your verizon that doesn't cost data - well, if time warner ever decided they wanted to cut out other news programming and information pieces to slant an agenda even more so than it spells doom there must be a level of protection for the media content that i cannot even believe i am saying. with "fake news" being swallowed up by the masses its a dangerous edge we could teeter on. The chances that verizon or any of the above is more interested in cutting away stories/slowing you down, rather than charging $ to see stories/keeping you fast? Negligible. So, you've identified a possible but highly unlikely issue. There is simply no money in these conspiracy theories. Again, I remind you that the accounting staff/traffic monitoring necessary to throttle bandwidth depending on every single user's current url at this micron, vs the next micron? It's cost idiocy. You'd have to have legions of machines and legions of people to do that. Nobody is going to spend $100 to make a nickel, and those are the actual #s, and literally what would be necessary. Don't tell me software is the answer here either. The architecture necessary to do this from the software side is untenable, and pointless. Hell, the database updates every minute, just to keep track of the adds/deletes of accounts/usage changes because somebody bought one of GG's "tiers" would consume way more resources in people and tech than can be justified. Look: you know what this smells like? It smells like marketing people. Word to the wise: marketing people are 99% of the cause of IT problems. Their constant bungling interference is why the Obamacare "website"(it was never a website, it was a massive enterprise integration) failed, it is why the IPhone App business will die soon, and its why none of what you are saying is ever going to happen. They love making unkeepable promises. They think ideas are all that is required, and that engineering is for the little people. Even if everything you say comes to pass? The systems necessary WILL crash in on themselves, precisely due to the ridiculous requirements imposed by marketing people. Exactly like Obamacare did. [This is an automated response.] You're an idiot. Created by DC Tom-bot, beta version 0.61. Call me an idiot again, I dare you.
OCinBuffalo Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 You're an idiot. Call me an idiot again, I dare you.
GG Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 Are you F'ing high? "I've helped" doesn't mean "I alone". Only somebody who has a particular derangement is blind to the difference in meaning. The truth is: I have written a ton on this issue. Unmitigated moron. Another unmitigated moron. Re-read what I said. It is at a fixed point. at ANY point in time. This does not mean that the point won't increase over time or, "literally, tomorrow"-->which is literally what I wrote. You still don't get it. They are willing to "give away" upper tiers...because they are just as willing to gamble that you don't use them fully. Now, surely a Wall Street person has the understanding of what the word "gamble" means, right? EDIT: And praytell, why does TIme Warner have "Business Class" which costs 2x what normal cable does? Why do they have tiers in their consumer offering at all? This is bandwidth. Clearly a concept you don't understand at all. Do you really think that if I am consuming bandwidth right now, and nobody else in my range is, that the cable company is going to slow me down, because I am getting higher speeds than I am supposed to get? If you do you are a complete buffoon. No. It is in the cable company's interest to clear my request as soon as possible, making room for potential new requests, as soon as possible. These "classes" that you are clinging to as some sort of point? They only exist as a way to get people to pay more...for what 4/5 times they are going to get anyway, given their usage. Bla bla bla bla. I'm great. I know it all. Even the crap I'm totally wrong about. Bla bla bla. Your contributions to the net neutrality discussions are summarized in the above line. You coudn't be more wrong about what you just wrote, but please tell us again how we don't understand our business.
OCinBuffalo Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) Bla bla bla bla. I'm great. I know it all. Even the crap I'm totally wrong about. Bla bla bla. Your contributions to the net neutrality discussions are summarized in the above line. You coudn't be more wrong about what you just wrote, but please tell us again how we don't understand our business. What exactly am I wrong about? You can't say, because you don't know. EDIT: No, seriously, I might be wrong about something above....but you can't say, because you don't know. Edited January 31, 2017 by OCinBuffalo
Recommended Posts