Duke4.net Forums: Net Neutrality....2.0? 3.0? - Duke4.net Forums

Jump to content

  • 5 Pages +
  • « First
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Net Neutrality....2.0? 3.0?  "All will be decided Dec 14"

User is offline   Forge 

  • Speaker of the Outhouse

#121

Start a new subject titled, "Medical Malpractice and Organ Harvesting" if that's what you'd like to talk about - the title of this thread is Net Neutrality.


So the bottom line is - yes the ISP can throttle my connections unless I pay a special fee. And yes they can sell whatever private information about me they want to third parties without my consent - as long as they classify said information as opt-out instead of opt-in. They decide what is sensitive and what isn't.
They can charge me for 10mps service and throttle every site and service on the internet except xfinity.com (their homepage) - which connects at 10mps, and they've met the letter of the "law"

Can and will are two different things, but the opportunity for exploitation shouldn't even be there.

You really should read this:
https://www.ftc.gov/...umer-protection
&
https://www.ftc.gov/...214_final_0.pdf
&
https://apps.fcc.gov...OC-347927A1.pdf

Th FCC & FTC will now "render advice and guidance" to the acts or practices of Internet service providers.
Lots of loop holes, and buried somewhere in there, broadband service from an ISP does not include connecting to the internet backbone (among other interesting tidbits).


(btw, I don't own a cell phone. And I have a bank card, which replaced my checkbook - which I also still have. And I read the contract for it. Funny, because if they violate my contract - I can report them to somebody beside themselves for investigation.)

This post has been edited by Forge: 16 December 2017 - 07:00 PM

1

User is offline   Forge 

  • Speaker of the Outhouse

#122

Grooving the language they use.

Consumers privacy is enforced by the FTC for retailers, app developers, data brokers, health companies, financial institutions, third -party service providers, and others.
ISPs should have the same approach.

Should.

Football players should stand for the national anthem too.
1

User is offline   Mark 

#123

"Football players should stand for the national anthem too. "

Attached thumbnail(s)

  • Attached Image: offtopic.jpg

3

User is offline   Forge 

  • Speaker of the Outhouse

#124

Posted Image
0

User is offline   Mark 

#125

I'm guessing thats a selfie of Forge from 2015 when NN was passed. :D
1

User is offline   Forge 

  • Speaker of the Outhouse

#126

post Mark. comment

because he's so clever

This post has been edited by Forge: 17 December 2017 - 07:07 AM

0

User is online   Danukem 

  • Duke Plus Developer

#127

View PostSeeJaneWun, on 16 December 2017 - 03:01 PM, said:

*and* there are options on the table that amusingly... *leftist* leaning folks have proposed without realizing they are embracing the entire point behind jettisoning the previous setup. It's like they suddenly discovered capitalism but can't quite connect the dots yet.


+1000
0

User is offline   Hank 

#128

View PostSeeJaneWun, on 16 December 2017 - 04:43 PM, said:

You don't have a First Amendment.

Could be. All I have is a Green Card. ;)

View PostSeeJaneWun, on 16 December 2017 - 04:43 PM, said:

You may think I'm just being sarcastic but I'm not. The *product* FAANG offers is heavily influenced by its need to satisfy US customers who do have a First Amendment. This influences the planet even in regions that don't. However, FAANG has recently been able to flaunt this and... again... it has consequences for the planet. If FAANG suddenly had to worry about people paying extra for internet packages that block advertisements, or accepting cheaper packages that didn't offer FAANG... suddenly they have a *real* product quality problem on their hand. The consequences again... ripple out and grant a shadow of First Amendment to the planet.

It's not an absolute. I don't expect FAANG to be a supporter of the 1st. But I expect the Internet to be.

View PostSeeJaneWun, on 16 December 2017 - 04:43 PM, said:

It was during the two years of Net Neutrality being active that massive censorship finally started to take off. And it's not because the tech ability wasn't there prior to 2015. It's because these couple of companies thought they had the market locked down where people weren't having to make meaningful cost/benefit decisions about using their services and products, so they endured far more than they normally would if the use of these high consumption services *also* carried specific personal costs.

Really? By whom?

In Spring Trump allowed AT&T, Verizon to ignor privacy of customers. Is this what no censorship means nowadays? All private information is open and for sale?

switching tracks
Winners and loosers of No-NN
https://www.marketwa...ling-2017-12-15

A lot of dead people supported the end of NN
https://www.fastcomp...-net-neutrality

Apparently everything Obama did was bad, Net Neutrality for one.
Yet, what about Clinton? He was the one giving rise to the current internet, as we know it.
If this is a blue/red issue, I say, Clinton's input was bad, and should be annulled. :D

Posted Image

This post has been edited by Hank: 17 December 2017 - 11:05 PM

0

User is offline   Forge 

  • Speaker of the Outhouse

#129

View PostHank, on 17 December 2017 - 10:11 PM, said:

A lot of dead people supported the end of NN
https://www.fastcomp...-net-neutrality

This is irrelevant. Pai didn't consult any outside input of any kind before putting the removal of NN to the vote. Their minds were already made up.
Here's a generic article - there are better, but this one will do in a pinch.
https://arstechnica....net-neutrality/

ISPs should now use businesses such as medical, financial, and data institutions as blueprints for handling people's private information. Should, not must. Opting-out isn't a 100% guarantee of privacy of your information.

Net Neutrality was garbage and needed to go, but the FCC hobbled the FTC in its ability to enforce any kind of regulation on ISPs.

There are only three things the ISPs have to be transparent about - throttling speed, blocking access to content, and paying for prioritized traffic.
All they have to do is put a blurb about speeds not being guaranteed on their service page, and they're free to do whatever they wish with your connection. Including not connecting it to the backbone - they can cache pages and direct your connection to those.
Everything else they're answerable for is basically regulations towards business practices to keep the current major ISPs from being monopolies. (no preventive tactics to stop another isp company from opening in their coverage area)

This post has been edited by Forge: 17 December 2017 - 11:50 PM

0

User is offline   Hank 

#130

View PostForge, on 17 December 2017 - 11:47 PM, said:

This is irrelevant. Pai didn't consult any outside input of any kind before putting the removal of NN to the vote. Their minds were already made up.
Here's a generic article - there are better, but this one will do in a pinch.
https://arstechnica....net-neutrality/

ISPs should now use businesses such as medical, financial, and data institutions as blueprints for handling people's private information. Should, not must. Opting-out isn't a 100% guarantee of privacy of your information.

Net Neutrality was garbage and needed to go, but the FCC hobbled the FTC in its ability to enforce any kind of regulation on ISPs.

There are only three things the ISPs have to be transparent about - throttling speed, blocking access to content, and paying for prioritized traffic.
All they have to do is put a blurb about speeds not being guaranteed on their service page, and they're free to do whatever they wish with your connection. Including not connecting it to the backbone - they can cache pages and direct your connection to those.
Everything else they're answerable for is basically regulations towards business practices to keep the current major ISPs from being monopolies. (no preventive tactics to stop another isp company from opening in their coverage area)

I posted this for laughs.

Net Neutrality is not garbage, the FCC is.

ACLU comments on this
https://www.aclu.org...-net-neutrality

Hank is fighting on
Attached Image: grumpy.jpg
0

Share this topic:


  • 5 Pages +
  • « First
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic


All copyrights and trademarks not owned by Voidpoint, LLC are the sole property of their respective owners. Play Ion Fury! ;) © Voidpoint, LLC

Enter your sign in name and password


Sign in options