FCC's Decision to End Net Neutrality

1. 90

   Luke Holmposted 7 years ago

   
   How will the FCC's decision to end net neutrality affect us as freelance writers on the internet? Will this change impact search results for our articles, and will we be restricted in accessing sites such as HubPages?

   replyreport
2. 61

   Paul Winngertposted 7 years ago

   We can thank the useless POS orange man-baby for this since he installed one of his stooges as head of the FCC.

   replyreport
   1. 76

      wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Why don't you tell us all how you really feel about your President?

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Paul Winngertposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Suprised you didn't capitalize "your".

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            They want all of us to own him. Makes them feel less responsible for the low man they chose.

            replyreport
3. 60

   Live to Learnposted 7 years ago

   Yes, let's just always turn everything to 'blame it on Trump'. It's so much easier to regurgitate than bother to think.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      PrettyPantherposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      So, was Trump opposed to this action by the FCC?

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         I'm opposed so, blame me. It will keep in line with the mentality displayed here.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            The point of my question is that, if Trump favored keeping net neutrality then he probably would gave appointed a commissioner who also favored keeping it. He also  would have vehemently spoken out against this action. Did he do either?
            
            If not, then he bears responsibility by virtue of his actions or lack thereof.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               This is not black and white. There are possible pros and some possible cons both ways. Nor is this move a done deal.
               
               But, let's not take the time to understand the issue because it's such a great opportunity to say something bad about somebody,

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  PrettyPantherposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  Um, since I haven't made any statements about the issue, how do you know I don't understand it? That's beside the point, anyway. I merely responded to your assertion about blaming it on Trump. I think it is quite reasonable to assume this happened as a direct result of Trump being elected, and then appointing someone to that position who he knew opposed net neutrality.
                  
                  Elections have consequences. It matters who sits in that office, regardless of what some people think.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     I would say you don't understand it because your statements imply it is bad. It is neither bad,nor good, in its entirety.
                     
                     My personal opinion is that Trump probably doesn't have a clear understanding of the issue, because he probably has little interest in the issue. I don't blame Trump for this FCC decision anymore than I blame him for the argument the couple in the hotel room next door had last night.
                     
                     One member of the commission is a Trump appointee. That appointee is not a dictator nor does he have more than one vote.
                     
                     I have, during the past year, moved into a job within the tech industry. Although I would prefer net neutrality, I understand and empathize with the argument against it. This is,on some levels, a first world entitlement issue. The consumer wants it all,right now, without thought to the costs involved in ensuring you have it.

                     replyreport
                     1. 76

                        wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        Listening to the comments from the board, it seems that three of them expect to see higher speeds and more competition as a result of being able to offer it. They did comment that there has been little effort anywhere to provide higher speeds because without the ability to charge for it there is no way to recoup costs. 
                        
                        The other two expect throttling - intentionally slowing - of what is currently being used if it isn't paid for with higher prices.  They seem to figure that we've maxed out on physically capabilities to send information faster, so companies won't try to provide higher speeds because it can't be done.
                        
                        It kind of looks like the same old arguments: government regulation to retain status quo or free market in the hopes competition will provide new, better and/or cheaper results.  Of the two my bet is on the second philosophy as the one producing better long term results while the first protects those unwilling to pay for better service, locking the entire industry into second class status, but with better short term results.

                        replyreport
                     2. 0

                        PrettyPantherposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        "I would say you don't understand it because your statements imply it is bad." Which statement did I make that implies net neutrality is bad? A direct quote would be nice. I merely stated my opinion that this decision occurred as a result of Trump  becoming president.
                        
                        So, is it your belief that heads of departments, commissions, and other groups do not influence policy? That is why a president gets to appoint those people, isn't it? They, in turn, influence who works for them and who is appointed to boards and commissions.
                        
                        But, we can just agree to disagree on whether this decision is a result of Trump becoming president.

                        replyreport
4. 83

   GA Andersonposted 7 years ago

   Is it safe to offer a non-Pres. Trump related comment? To address the OP without referring to Trump?
   
   For instance; Live to learn and PrettyPanther, it appears you both disagree with dropping the Net Neutrality regulation. Why?
   
   Have you looked into the pro-NN, (Net Neutrality), arguments? I have, but only a surface skim, and I am not sure I can believe all the pro-NN claims.
   
   Just one point - the "fast lane/slow lane" claim. Isn't that a market function that many of us are already okay with? I have Comcast broadband. I can get increased speed by paying more per month. It's my choice. Isn't that what we are talking about?
   
   Consider that same point from a different perspective. A coax cable has a maximum bandwidth capacity. Currently that maximum handles all a provider's customers - at a uniform cost rate. Along comes Netflix, and their streaming demand is half of the provider's bandwidth capacity. Does the provider downgrade half of it's customer's performance speeds to accommodate Netflix demand? After all, Netflix is profiting from their broadband capacity access. Profiting at a business cost the same as a private customer. The provider will will still make the same amount of money - but a lot of customers will lose their access capacity. Or, should the government force the provider to maintain their customer base - and their uniform rates - by spending the investment needed to upgrade their capacity to accommodate Netflix? Shouldn't that be a private market consideration?
   
   I think taking the fast lane/slow lane argument out of the big fish like NetFlix perspective, and applying it to my level of internet use is stretching the point too far. But I am far from confident that I am right - yet.
   
   But at this point... I would answer the OP's question with a "No," whichever way the Net Neutrality issue goes, we probably won't be affected. Unless of course we have to pay more because our internet providers bump rates to cover the costs for higher capacity infrastructure.
   
   GA

   replyreport
5. 72

   Kathleen Cochranposted 7 years ago

   How much damage is going to be done before we get rid of the powers that be right now?

   replyreport
6. 90

   Luke Holmposted 7 years ago

   "This could be the first trumpet
   Might as well be the last
   Many more will have to suffer
   Many more will have to die
   Don't ask me why
   Things are not the way they used to be
   I won't tell no lie
   One and all got to face reality now
   Though I try to find the answer
   To all the questions they ask
   Though I know it's impossible
   To go living through the past
   Don't tell no lie
   There's a natural mystic
   Blowing through the air" (Bob Marley)

   replyreport