This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
The NCTA has repeatedly stated over the years that net neutrality rules aren't needed because ISPs already follow net neutrality principles. "Internet service providers have always delivered open, unrestricted Internet service. Consumers enjoy the web content and applications of their choosing without any blocking, throttling, or interference," the group said.
Lmao, really? The audacity of these cunts.
Wow. Talk about professional gaslighting. Not enough people are aware that the Obama-era FTC enacted the policy because AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon were all caught throttling Netflix and prioritizing their own competing services.
Thanks Obama
And tethering. Verizon was basically forced to stop blocking tethering apps by the FCC. My complaint was one of the ones which started the enforcement.
The Lion, the Witch, and the Audacity of this Bitch.
I remember when Comcast was caught illegally using Sandvine to throttle people using bittorrent.
Maybe if they didn't sell people more bandwidth than they could provide they wouldn't have to throttle people below the service they paid for to work for everyone.
I would, in theory, be all for allowing companies to prioritize latency to services and protocols that benefit from it. Except they oversell the absolute shit out of their service, and can't be trusted to give you what you pay for if they don't like your traffic.
Failing to provide the full bandwidth they advertised for even one percent of a given month should result in fines that massively exceed what they charged for that month. Selling shit you don't have is not acceptable.
Oh good, if that is all true, you wont have to change anything to be compliant with new laws and should have no issue with them.
Money has no shame. Businesses only have reactionary shame in relation to possible loss of money.
It's funny because wireless ISPs literally advertise that they throttle video to certain resolutions unless you buy a higher tier.
The cable lobby loves to bring up rural areas but when we gave them millions to build out they just took the money, said fuck it and did jack shit. I'm beginning to think that they prefer to under serve those areas and then use that as a bargaining chip to get everything they want.
I am in New England. Looking to buy a home. The amount of area that is not covered at 100/10 is fucking criminal. Like, they upped my price this year. For what? Transferring packets didn't get more expensive. Did you go e your employees raises? No? Are you expanding your infrastructure? No?
Like what the fuck.
The power companies in my area started installing fiber on the power lines and running their own ISPs.
No data caps or anything, I'm raw dogging these torrents at like 80 megabytes a second, I even started running my own home server
I almost feel bad for rural people until I realize they're the ones voting for the people who make sure rural people don't get services. Redneck America wants to close the USPS for fuck sakes.
My parents live in butt fuck nowhere and are in a fiber co-op paying like $70/month for unlimited 1gbps up/down.
Meanwhile I live in the (extremely left) Capitol City of my state and pay Comcast $165/month for like 175mbps capped at 1TB, with some absurd overage fee like $10/5GB over until I hit $100 over and then it's "unlimited" but seems throttled.
In Australia we watched American ISPs do exactly that and then we did the exact same thing with the exact same result because our politicians are corrupt pieces of shit with no backbone, integrity or ethics.
Eminent domain the final mile and be done with it. These companies have no business holding our national infrastructure hostage.
Taxpayers have already paid them billions for broken promises. It's been long demonstrated the oligopolistic communications industry cannot be trusted to provide what the public needs at fair pricing.
Its time to nationalize ISPs.
Revoke their corporate charter, nationalize their infrastructure, sell it to municipal ISPs.
Shoot them all into the sun.
apparently its less effort/energy to shoot them into deep space.
but either way is good.
Jessica Rosenworcel is a champ. She has been fighting this fight for years. The week Ajit Pai (Ashit Pie) ended net neutrality using falsified public comments, a group gathered in front of the FCC to protest the change. I went down there for a few hours and Jessica came to the window and waved to us.
Haha oh man it's weird to see this mentioned so many years later.
I helped organize that protest. Thanks for coming down with us!
“heavy-handed regulation will not just hobble network investment and innovation, it will also seriously jeopardize our nation’s collective efforts to build and sustain reliable broadband in rural and unserved communities”
They said exactly the same thing when the first net neutrality laws were getting put in place, then after the laws went into effect the companies went on to invest record amounts in innovation and infrastructure. Funny how their words are completely meaningless.
Yaknow what does hobble investment and innovation?
It rhymes with “shmonopolies”.
"Innovation" just means ways to milk people these days .
Innovation is part of the executive buzzword bingo board for all announcements.
It doesn't actually mean anything to these people. The only thing that has weight is what will enrich the wealth of the ownership class (shareholders.)
Why can't you just be decent people?
Can't wait until my liberal city finishes our city owned isp. You can't trust business to be in control of essential services
There was an academic paper put out a long time ago that basically argued for essential services like food, water, etc to be given non-profit status so corpo's couldn't do this sort of thing.
Every piece of shit greedy corporation can't hide from their lies when they say things are too expensive to implement correctly or pay people appropriately when they are simultaneously posting profits measured in billions...
Eat the rich. Fucking cunts.
A threat like that should disqualify them from even trying to do it.
You hear that, law school students? Job security! Because lawyers are the ones who really win in situations like this.
'We know we're the bad guys so we're going to announce our intentions like a comic book villain....'
Let me plug Counter Points, a favorite political show of mine.
They recently talked about FTC Chair Lina Khan and Apple's monopoly, the government's anti-trust lawsuit against Apple, and monopolies in general. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMyChnACLKQ
It's tangential, but it came to mind.
If the cable companies want lawsuits, let's give them what they want in the form of anti-trust lawsuits and break them up.
Good, let them use their money on litigation instead of lobbying.
Yup, I'm all for it. Put it in a ballot and we'll vote to enshrine it into law.
One of my general rules of thumb is: if cable companies are for it, it must suck.
These people forget that they have to exist physically alongside us "citizens". Your layers of obfuscation won't save your reputation forever. Eventually people will be so tired of everything be stacked against us we'll just riot and take from these corpos.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The Federal Communications Commission has scheduled an April 25 vote to restore net neutrality rules similar to the ones introduced during the Obama era and repealed under former President Trump.
"A return to the FCC's overwhelmingly popular and court-approved standard of net neutrality will allow the agency to serve once again as a strong consumer advocate of an open Internet."
In October 2023, the FCC voted 3–2 along party lines to seek public comment on restoring net neutrality rules and common-carrier regulation of Internet service providers under Title II of the Communications Act.
While there hasn't been a national standard since then-Chairman Ajit Pai led a repeal in 2017, Internet service providers still have to follow net neutrality rules because California and other states impose their own similar regulations.
"Reimposing heavy-handed regulation will not just hobble network investment and innovation, it will also seriously jeopardize our nation's collective efforts to build and sustain reliable broadband in rural and unserved communities," cable lobbyist Michael Powell said today.
The cable group argues that restoring net neutrality rules will interfere with the Biden administration plan to expand broadband access with a $42.45 billion grant program that will distribute public money to ISPs.
The original article contains 521 words, the summary contains 199 words. Saved 62%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
When companies protest against regulation while claiming that they already adhere to the same rules, then something is clearly off, and one better gets regulation through, because they plan to ditch that adherence as soon as the governmental regulations are off the table.
Sounds like a good time to switch to 5G internet and cancel cable.
