RIP Net Neutrality

I've heard Korean internet is way better than American because there are so many competitors trying to outdo each other.

It's also hard to get started as an ISP in America because everything is so spread out geographically. The up-front costs of running cables to connect everyone is much higher than more population-dense countries.

 

Actually, FCC's new policy is trying to combat monopolies by creating competition. By doing so, people won't have to be tied to one or two options for an ISP.

 

Lmao I rely on those illegal streaming sites for my cavs games, if congress lets it through im screwed. Praying congress makes the right decision here tbh.

 

still has to go through congress and trump

 

Right, but if it passes through the HoRs, the bill goes to Trump to sign or veto. He's going to sign it b/c he's a corporate man and he'll help the big business. That's why the last chance to stop the bill is the HoRs.

 

>breaks the law
>government does something about it
>complains about not being able to break the law anymore

 

I shouldn't have to pay that much money to watch outside my home state. College students don't tend to have 700+ dollars laying around. Of course I'm gonna use illegal streams. The NBA and others are notorious for blacking out games because they're being broadcasted nationally on channels like ESPN, and you can't even watch local games because supposedly EVERYONE owns cable. They are worse criminals than I am by using illegal streams. They lie about what they provide when they advertise it. Utterly ridiculous.

 

Don't know if I'm violating some sort of necroposting rule by posting on this thread, but there's a few people with common misconceptions about the repeal so I'd like to clear that up.

Don't think you fully understand the actual consequences of the repeal. The repeal that has been put into place by the FCC is an abolishment of it's Title II reclassification back in 2015 under Obama administration. Before this, Net Neutrality had existed under Title I since 1996 under the telecommunications act- however, the internet service provision market was unregulated; large monopolies like Verizon were legally allowed to hinder access to Netflix streaming unless they paid a surmountable fee to remove the throttle for Verizon customers. Companies like AT&T blocked services such as FaceTime because they simply "didn't like the competition" - just a couple of examples from a plethora of complicit actions carried out by said ISPs. In 2015, NN was reclassified under Title II which strapped legislation onto these common carriers that disallowed this to happen on a legal level. Now this has been reversed, your Internet is essentially going back to what it prior to 2015 - were you having to pay extra subscription fees for access to Instagram and YouTube then? No; a phantom interpretation of the actual consequences of the repeal.

To put it simply, your ISP can legally hinder or even prevent you from accessing a site/service unless the said organisation can avoid being throttled by paying them large amounts of money. Or they can just block them on the premise that they don't like the competition; not that they have to specify. They can also introduce paid fast lanes for consumers, which will slowly be slipping into place within the next few months.

About 2 years actually.

No, the repeal had an 83% disapproval rate among 1,077 registered voters in a poll conducted by the Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland. This bears no weight on congress.

Another huge misconception; that congress will be able to prevent it.

Net Neutrality is considered a republican deregulation; and currently the Republicans hold the majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. Let's say a Congressional Review Act was initiated, it would need a majority vote in favour of scrapping the bill introduced by the GOP - the majority of republicans will veto, and the remaining minority of them + the democrats in favour will not be sufficient enough for the CRA to progress. I'm not even going to factor in the 2 independent senators into this. I guess you could say it's not a case of whether Congress have power to prevent it, just that they won't. Let's say hypothetically the CRA passed congress, it would need to be signed by Trump for it to take effect, which brings me to my next point:

If the CRA even made it to Trump's desk, he then bears the final decision as to whether or not it is passed. He will veto. Why? Because his election campaign was funded millions by organisations such as Comcast to make the repeal so.

Net Neutrality's repeal is a consequence of Trump's election; it's allowed Ajit Pai (who's a republican by the way) secure his position as chairman of the FCC, and when he leaves he'll receive millions more in a job he's secured with either Verizon or Comcast when he leaves - two organisations that benefit massively from this.

This just demonstrates corruption at its worst; where a bill is allowed to be passed that benefits some of the wealthiest organisations in the world at the expense of everyone underneath this.