Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FCC votes to kill net neutrality rules
washingtonexaminer.com ^ | 12/14/17 | Melissa Quinn

Posted on 12/14/2017 10:36:00 AM PST by ColdOne

The Federal Communications Commission voted Thursday to repeal net neutrality rules, over the objection of Democrats in Congress, Internet activists and online companies.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, Commissioner Michael O’Rielly, and Commissioner Brendan Carr, all Republicans, supported the proposed rollback of the Obama-era rules. Democratic Commissioners Mignon Clyburn and Jessica Rosenworcel opposed the change.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ajitpai; brendancarr; cutgovernment; cutregulations; fcc; fec; internet; jessicarosenworcel; michaelorielly; mignonclyburn; netneutrality; regulations; russia; trump; trumpwinsagain; winning
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-224 next last
To: hsmomx3

No. They would not. They don’t see the purpose in a market place and don’t value freedom like life itself.

Top down structures never work well. Flat diversified structures are efficient, honest and effective.

Freedom Works.

The left is all about subjection and tyranny.


181 posted on 12/14/2017 6:43:49 PM PST by Texas Fossil ((Texas is not where you were born, but a Free State of Heart, Mind & Attitude!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

Comment #182 Removed by Moderator

To: hsmomx3
My liberal friends are going bonkers saying it is going to raise internet rates big time and restrict internet access.

Maybe, maybe not, but the door to that has been opened. Should ISPs decide to make you pay for content (reading FR for example) there is nothing to stop them now that NN has been repealed.

The internet is now one big cable network. Want to get netflix or rededt or Drudge? Pick the plan that is right for you, only 35 bucks a month.

Got a website you want people to see? That's an extra $50/month for every ISP. You have to pay to play.

183 posted on 12/14/2017 7:25:36 PM PST by jpsb (Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied. Otto von Bismark)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: 850.933.8511oz
You start getting some users, but you can only buy as much bandwidth as the L3 ISP is willing to deliver to your door with their fiber connections (if you’re lucky).

So the ISP may not be willing to sell you the bandwidth you need. OK so far.

Net Neutrality tells them that, even if they WANT to provide you the option to pay more to have higher QoS (Quality of Service) for your connections, they’re not allowed to do so.

Nothing in nn limits the bandwidth an ISP can sell to a customer.

Nothing.

Further, aside from being wrong this has nothing to do with the initial problem, which is the ISP being unwilling to sell you the bandwidth you need.

... by having language in there that incites lawmakers to classify Internet access as a utility, it ENSURES that the ISP’s never have to compete with one another...

Absolute nonsense and obviously untrue. We've had nn rules for a couple of years now and there's more competition than ever.

Your friend may be an expert on the technology of the internet but he has no clue on the business side.

184 posted on 12/14/2017 8:14:30 PM PST by semimojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

That is where it ends. Yep.


185 posted on 12/14/2017 8:22:57 PM PST by rlmorel (Liberals: American Liberty is the egg that requires breaking to make their Utopian omelette.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: brownsfan
> I can see both sides to this. The potential for a provider charging you based on what “tier” of web access you want, (not speed, but actual sites you visit), is not appealing.

So can I, and living where I choose to (a rural part of upstate NY), I have one, count 'em, ONE useful Internet Service Provider available (Frontier Communications). I am completely at their mercy, because the other so-called alternatives are unacceptably slow (dial-up) or effectively half-duplex (satellite). I do considerable remote work for my employer and the minimum I need is what I currently have over bonded DSL: 25Mbps down, 1Mbps up, with minimal delay. I don't upload that much material remotely, but I have to do remote video conferencing, etc.

I'll be interested to see what the variable rates become, for the various domains I have to work with. Might not be pretty.

OTOH, I abhor government regulations of businesses whose profit interest coincides with useful innovation and technological development. So if the loss of NN means ultimately I'll have more bandwidth, great. But if it means I can't work remotely, I'm totally screwed.

186 posted on 12/14/2017 8:26:40 PM PST by dayglored ("Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Who really can know what any of this means, NEUTRALITY SCHMALITY, the ISP’s are big box monopolies and will do as they please, the politicians will help them, and we will take whatever they give us


187 posted on 12/14/2017 8:58:54 PM PST by KTM rider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KTM rider

I know that if Mobama, Soreass, Fakebook, and Gargle are for it, it ain’t good, period.


188 posted on 12/14/2017 9:03:32 PM PST by crosdaddy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil
In my opinion, this is a good thing. Net neutrality as written, does not not mean what the name implies.

Its the new Fairness Doctrine

189 posted on 12/14/2017 9:43:22 PM PST by datricker (Cut Taxes Repeal ACA Deport DACA - Americans First, Build the Wall, Lock her up MAGA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: brownsfan

At the _Donald at Reddit they are wildly celebrating the end of NN.


190 posted on 12/14/2017 10:12:23 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: Cementjungle

All brought to you by the Ministry of Truth.


191 posted on 12/15/2017 12:08:04 AM PST by Eleutheria5 (“If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: datricker

It empowers fed bureaucraps. Gives them to path to smother and sensor all coms.


192 posted on 12/15/2017 2:04:06 AM PST by Texas Fossil ((Texas is not where you were born, but a Free State of Heart, Mind & Attitude!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: semimojo
Or, more likely, slowing down the Netflix movie but not theirs.

The nn rules basically say it's up to the user to decide what content he wants to call up on the internet provided he's willing to pay for the bandwidth, and the ISP can't charge differently for the same content from different providers.

I have no problem with the ISP’s having different tiers of service and charging appropriately for speed or even on data limits on streaming or uploading absent restrictions on the content provider. But like you said, they shouldn’t be allowed to slow down content based on who they want to be winners and losers based on their ownership or shared ownership. But it isn’t just movie streaming services.

To put it another way, the Huffington Post is owned by Oath Inc. which is a subsidiary of Verizon Communications. So let’s say in the area where I live the only ISP providing high speed internet is Verizon, I’m not talking cellular service, but Fios.

Let’s say that Verizon allows their Fios subscribers to access Huffington Post at the highest speed at which you have subscribed and paid for, the pages and content load at lighting speed. But let’s say you like going to Breitbart instead. But since Verizon sees Breitbart as a competitor to Huffington Post which it owns it and perhaps even doesn’t like the content on Breitbart, they throttle it, meaning when you try to access Breitbart, the pages are painfully slow in loading, if they even load at all.

That is what I understood that nn would, at least in theory prevent.

193 posted on 12/15/2017 3:17:28 AM PST by MD Expat in PA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

Comment #194 Removed by Moderator

To: Rebelbase

#165 - lol...technically correct. Heck, babies are given iPads as “binkies” now.


195 posted on 12/15/2017 4:26:16 AM PST by Caipirabob (Communists...Socialists...Fascists & AntiFa...Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Google, the robber barons of personal privacy, are not going to like this.


196 posted on 12/15/2017 5:00:04 AM PST by Neoliberalnot (MSM is our greatest threat. Disney, Comcast, Hollywood, NYTimes, WaPo...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Thank you. We disagree on some things, but not this. You


197 posted on 12/15/2017 5:07:45 AM PST by Neoliberalnot (MSM is our greatest threat. Disney, Comcast, Hollywood, NYTimes, WaPo...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

My kids are freaking out.
I told them the Internet was just fine before net neutrality and will be just fine after net neutrality.
They started talking about cost.
I told them what we’re already paying Verizon.
At that point they told me I just “don’t understand”
Lol!


198 posted on 12/15/2017 5:11:12 AM PST by Scotswife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape

Yep, back in the day when the Obama/ Clinton crime families ran it all and looted millions. Times are changing.


199 posted on 12/15/2017 5:11:37 AM PST by Neoliberalnot (MSM is our greatest threat. Disney, Comcast, Hollywood, NYTimes, WaPo...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Nipfan

That is one smart cat


200 posted on 12/15/2017 5:40:33 AM PST by Scotswife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-224 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson