Net Neutrality Repealed in the US

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Hammer89 wrote: »

I have one question and one question only: Can I still ****?

No and yes. No, it's still going to be sinful; while yes, but you might have to get used to this:

ThisRegard

Karsini wrote: »

But you're still favouring one service over another.

I suppose it could be argued that they're just given people what they want, reflecting the most used apps, rather than being driven by those who own the apps.

Digital Solitude

ThisRegard wrote: »

I suppose it could be argued that they're just given people what they want, reflecting the most used apps, rather than being driven by those who own the apps.

I would imagine it stifles competition somewhat.

How would you go about setting up a new social network or a new video hosting site when your main and biggest competitors don't count towards consumers data cap, but yours does.

I don't think it's directly malicious from Eir, VF, 3 etcs POV but I'd be surprised if Facebook, Twitter and Google aren't paying a hat of money to ensure they're the only ones benefitting

Sonics2k

Karsini wrote: »

But if we have Net Neutrality, how are MEO getting away with what they're doing?

I'm not an expert on it, but I believe that MEO is not actually preventing/blocking/throttling you from accessing this sites unless you pay, rather they give you 'unlimited' access to them each month and have no worry about using up your data allowance.

it's targeted at people who would easily use say 5gb of data on just Snapchat in a month, but the monthly allowance overall is 6gb. Meaning they only have 1gb left for the rest of the data.

I'm not saying I'm a fan of it, but this doesn't really break net neutrality.

If MEO or another network decided to massively reduce your speeds when using Netflix, or simply prevent you from using it, unless you paid extra then that would be against Net Neutrality laws.

cherryghost

ThisRegard wrote: »

Have you read how Netflix manage their data over the internet via their CDNs they pay for?

Netflix operate their own CDN, for well over a year now.

ThisRegard

Digital Solitude wrote: »

I would imagine it stifles competition somewhat.

How would you go about setting up a new social network or a new video hosting site when your main and biggest competitors don't count towards consumers data cap, but yours does.

As I said, the cap is so large these days there's little obstruction to using any service.

cherryghost wrote: »

Netflix operate their own CDN, for well over a year now.

That's my point.

Digital Solitude

ThisRegard wrote: »

As I said, the cap is so large these days there's little obstruction to using any service.

Not true at all, most mobile plans in this country have a cap of 20-30gb maximum, less than 1gb a day.

What would you consider a large cap?

Chrongen

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

So, potentially daft question coming in here (not as tech savvy as most of you here), but will this effect non-US internet users?

Eventually

Chrongen

Wurly wrote: »

THe FCC in America have repealed Net Neutrality... Here's just a glimpse of what this means for Americans:



Source: https://www.engadget.com/2017/12/14/net-neutrality-what-now/

The definition of net neutrality is: "The principle that Internet service providers should enable access to all content and applications regardless of the source, and without favouring or blocking particular products or websites.".

Oh dear!! This is a little scary...... Basically, the internet is set to become an absolute sh!t show for the smaller ISP's... All of the conglomerates in bed with the big guys will have quick access granted to their websites. The others will be slow as bejaysis. So if you're on your fave site and it's barely loading, you're eventually going to look elsewhere. And that elsewhere will be what they decide you look at. You won't get that decision anymore.

Any of the last remaining fools who still cling to the notion that the US has anything to do with freedom of any kind need to have their heads tested.

This will also wipe out websites/blogs/news services that are critical of the US government or carry content that is in anyway embarrassing or damning.

RIP Wikileaks.

TAFKAlawhec

Karsini wrote: »

We actually don't. It's how a Portugese ISP can do this...

If you count Snopes as being reliable, then the things being made available on the MEO page are additional extras available on top of standard internet access on their mobile network. Not quite the same as what's been given the green light in the USA where certain traffic can be throttled at the whim of the ISP for company preference or extortion etc.

https://www.snopes.com/portugal-net-neutrality/

On the issues of the likes of Facebook, Wikipedia and others being zero-rated on mobile data plans, while I don't see it myself as being inherently wrong I can understand the reasons opposing it as being against net neutrality in the strictest sense which at the same time puts users into a semi-walled garden which inhibits outside competitors. If there had to be a choice between an offer of specific sites of an internet plan getting zero rated being banned, and between what is now being allowed in the USA, I'd choose the former every time.

I take that back so.

But it does bring up a point, if the EU do have net neutrality rules, then Virgin Media were obviously violating them back at the end of 2015 with the Netflix and YouTube throttling. I left at the time so I don't know if it's still going on with YouTube, but many believe that Netflix paid up, hence the integration with Horizon TV now.

ThisRegard

Digital Solitude wrote: »

Not true at all, most mobile plans in this country have a cap of 20-30gb maximum, less than 1gb a day.

What would you consider a large cap?

I get by with 1GB a month!

PLL

I always thought charges would come in for Social Media. I mean we pay sky to transmit channels we like. Why shouldn't we pay for apps that people spend hours on? They're businesses' after all. People will pay to use them.

PLL

PLL wrote: »

I always thought charges would come in for Social Media. I mean we pay sky to transmit channels we like. Why shouldn't we pay for apps that people spend hours on? They're businesses' after all. People will pay to use them.

That analogy doesn't really work here though. When you watch pay TV, you pay the broadcaster, not the service provider. That would be the equivalent of paying SES (the satellite operator) to watch a channel on the satellite. In that case, the channel doesn't get the money, the satellite operator does.

Digital Solitude

ThisRegard wrote: »

I get by with 1GB a month!

Fair ****s, I regularly use 25gb+, would often have hit 100gb+ before I got broadband in the house.

As another poster said, if I were to allow FB and YouTube data free as opposed to a total repeal of NN, I'd give the free data every time. I don't necessarily agree with the practice but I can see the benefits for consumers.

Back to US NN, when does this become finalised? By my understanding it can still be overturned.

wheresmahbombs

ThisRegard wrote: »

I get by with 1GB a month!

Wow. I wonder what it would be like if I had to deal with the same struggle you endure.

Also, **** Ajit Pai.