Net Neutrality

[icemanxp300]

Shouldn't an ISP have the right to throttle bandwidth to such services that are swamping their networks and slowing access to other internet sites?

There isn't an easy answer here.

 

NO, they should not! Shouldn't the customer get what they pay for? When you sign up for a service plan that gives you uploads speeds of 60Mbps or what not, you better get that on ever website you visit!

 

They can speed up all they want, but they better not limit.

[Inky]

I don't trust government. That's why I'm against net neutrality. I'm not going any further on this.

[JamesD]

 

NO, they should not! Shouldn't the customer get what they pay for? When you sign up for a service plan that gives you uploads speeds of 60Mbps or what not, you better get that on ever website you visit!

 

They can speed up all they want, but they better not limit.

The customer has the right to chose a different ISP

How do people not get this

[icemanxp300]

The customer has the right to chose a different ISP

How do people not get this

 

My zipcode is 14568 show me all my damn choices of ISP providers!

 

FYI I only want cable! I don't want a shitty cellphone hotspot or laggy DSL.

 

I have spectrum now, by all means though show me ALL the other ISP providers I can choose from.

[NE146]

 

My zipcode is 14568 show me all my damn choices of ISP providers!

 

FYI I only want cable! I don't want a shitty cellphone hotspot or laggy DSL.

 

I have spectrum now, by all means though show me ALL the other ISP providers I can choose from.

 

These things have far reaching impact.. so are you talking now? A decade from now? 20 years from now? When?

[icemanxp300]

I'm saying I'm sick of the argument of choosing a different ISP when I have ONE to choose from. I need cable for what I do online, plain and simple. There is no way in hell in the foreseeable future anyone is going to invest the cost it takes to run new cable/fiber optic lines in low population areas like I and many others live in. If anyone thinks you are going to get a 3rd party provider to lease through the cable companies existing lines and offer better deals you are blind and naïve.

 

I honestly do not see anybody trying to run any lines to most places in the next decade or more. It's simple math. You put your resources in areas of the most populated to obtain the biggest user base. Nobody will invest what it takes to try and obtain a sliver of a pie.

[JamesD]

I'm saying I'm sick of the argument of choosing a different ISP when I have ONE to choose from. I need cable for what I do online, plain and simple. There is no way in hell in the foreseeable future anyone is going to invest the cost it takes to run new cable/fiber optic lines in low population areas like I and many others live in. If anyone thinks you are going to get a 3rd party provider to lease through the cable companies existing lines and offer better deals you are blind and naïve.

 

I honestly do not see anybody trying to run any lines to most places in the next decade or more. It's simple math. You put your resources in areas of the most populated to obtain the biggest user base. Nobody will invest what it takes to try and obtain a sliver of a pie.

Who says you need cable or fiber? My broadband is 4G and a lowly 2MB/s. I can't download anything and everything or watch 4K HD video, but it's enough to stream lower quality 1080i (which is still really good) and 720p. It would be more than enough for me if it were still unlimited like when I originally got it. Hell, even 200GB per month would be enough for me and I get my TV over internet. Then I wouldn't have to ration my TV viewing. My provider offers higher speeds but I didn't want to pay more, and for cities with dedicated internet towers they still offer unlimited internet, but I'm just out of range.

 

Would I use more if I had it? Stupid question. But claiming you have no other options is completely disingenuous.

 

As for your last argument... my ISP is VIAERO Wireless. Their entire business was built on serving areas where the big companies didn't want to build towers because there wasn't a large enough population. Now they have cell phone and internet coverage over multiple states. But they don't serve the heavily populated areas. Exactly the opposite of your claim.

 

[SignGuy81]

Who says you need cable or fiber? My broadband is 4G and a lowly 2MB/s. I can't download anything and everything or watch 4K HD video, but it's enough to stream lower quality 1080i (which is still really good) and 720p. It would be more than enough for me if it were still unlimited like when I originally got it. Hell, even 200GB per month would be enough for me and I get my TV over internet. Then I wouldn't have to ration my TV viewing. My provider offers higher speeds but I didn't want to pay more, and for cities with dedicated internet towers they still offer unlimited internet, but I'm just out of range.

 

Would I use more if I had it? Stupid question. But claiming you have no other options is completely disingenuous.

 

As for your last argument... my ISP is VIAERO Wireless. Their entire business was built on serving areas where the big companies didn't want to build towers because there wasn't a large enough population. Now they have cell phone and internet coverage over multiple states. But they don't serve the heavily populated areas. Exactly the opposite of your claim.

 

 

2MB would mean 2 megabytes per second, I'm sure you mean 2Mb/s(megabits) which still is not enough HD streaming as you need around 5Mb/s for that if you don't want to run into buffering issues.

 

EDIT: I just realized I misread what you wrote I thought I saw 1080p but you mentioned the lower quality HD so maybe yeah, but still who cares it is still crap nobody wants to use wireless service for their home internet.

Edited November 30, 2017 by SignGuy81

[icemanxp300]

LOL is this guy for real? He wants to compare 2Mbps to 60Mbps, who the hell is going to online game with that shit!

 

Then this guy wants to compare building ONE tower to emit a shitty wireless signal as compared to running numerous miles of cable/fiber optics.

 

It is more than obvious this guy is oblivious here.

[SignGuy81]

I still think that 2Mb/s as well isn't even good enough for 720p streaming I'll have to check into it but I gave benefit of doubt. Just imagine if he has a family and several want to get on youtube, at the same time. I can see the fighting now.

[JamesD]

This guy said they offer faster speeds and I said I don't want to pay for them.
This guy streams from VUDU and until recent bandwidth drops was able to watch in HD.

Just because YOU want 60Mb/s doesn't mean everyone does. People do have options. If you want to stick to your current provider, by all means, you have that option.
But don't say there aren't other choices because it's not true.

One wireless signal isn't bad when it's split between hundreds of people rather than thousands.

Edited November 30, 2017 by JamesD

[JamesD]

BTW, 5G is supposed to debut around 2020, so wireless is going to become a lot more competitive.

[Dripfree]

I must say I am enjoying this debate very much. The most interesting thing is seeing every person's view and why they feel that way. However the parts I enjoy the most are the least useful. This is an issue that is too far reaching to base an argument off of your own circumstances. It is truly no more than an argument of the role of government. An argument can be man on both sides on that premise alone. Your circumstances are irrelevant. No matter what your isp options are or how you choose to use the net does not matter. Why? You literally have infinite options. Some may seem very radical but they are there. You can move if you don't like the options where you live. You could even boycott the internet if you so choose. To say that laws must be passed because you want to play video games on the internet is rather silly.

Edited November 30, 2017 by Dripfree

[icemanxp300]

Just because YOU want 60Mb/s doesn't mean everyone does.

 

Just because you want a wireless connection doesn't mean everyone does. You keep saying we have options. Yeah we do, but when the other options are complete shit and will not support our needs that really blows the entire "competition" argument.

 

You have argued this entire thread about options. Fact is "realistic" options do not exist for many of us to continue doing what we do on the internet.

 

That is great a wireless signal works for you and all you want to do on your PHONE! Some of us actually have a real computer and a real home network, and we do stuff the requires a real connection that is provided to us by one and only one ISP.

[SignGuy81]

Well, here is another argument I would like to add.

 

The way cable works I believe is that the provider pays for networks to be included in their lineup. It may work the other way around for some networks. Either case a deal was made between the two and the cable company offers that to you as their offer.

 

Now it seems like they are basically going to be able to pick anything they want on the web and offer to you as if it is from them. We've seen the advert posted with the facebook, twitter logo and such with verizon. I guess their may still have to be agreements made between the parties for those listed I don't have the details.

 

But the main point I'm now going to get to is, the fact anytime with cable there is a dispute on money(like for example with the web instead could be ISP says you need to pay us money youtube to be in our fast lane, youtube then says no you need to pay me money to advertise and include me in your package instead, as this ISP over here is doing, etc etc.) what happens, a channel blackout.

Edited November 30, 2017 by SignGuy81

[JamesD]

Just because you want a wireless connection doesn't mean everyone does. You keep saying we have options. Yeah we do, but when the other options are complete shit and will not support our needs that really blows the entire "competition" argument.

 

You have argued this entire thread about options. Fact is "realistic" options do not exist for many of us to continue doing what we do on the internet.

 

That is great a wireless signal works for you and all you want to do on your PHONE! Some of us actually have a real computer and a real home network, and we do stuff the requires a real connection that is provided to us by one and only one ISP.

Phone? Who said anything about a phone? I use a device plugged into my router.

I have several smart TVs, two Blu-ray players with apps, two laptops, multiple linux & android boxes, a file server, two Rokus, wireless printers, XBOX 360, and smart phones attached to my Wifi, plus I have a guest Wifi setup... but I apparently don't know what a real computer or real network is.

 

Want wireless? Is any part or your argument ever based on what I actually say rather than what you make up?

It's not that I want a wireless connection. I really don't care how it's delivered.

It's that there are things i don't like about the other options. It's a choice.

My ISP offers plans with up to 8Mb/s for my current setup, and 15 if I were within range of the dedicated tower using a beam antenna on my house.

Other wireless providers serving the area offer up to 25 Mb/s but they require a multi-year contract on top of new equipment, and I don't want to do that.

Satellite offers downloads up to 25 Mb/s but it sucks horribly.

The local cable company offers 50Mb/s but my neighbor's aren't getting the advertised speed and have had it worked on several times.

My connection would be over the same wires. Plus it's $30 more per month, and requires equipment I may stop using in a month, all for something that doesn't deliver what it promises.

FWIW, I used to be able to stream HD video due to the way my ISP throttled bandwidth, but that changed recently so I may have to change my plan or switch providers.

 

As far as I can tell, your need for 60 Mb/s is lag free online gaming while your family streams their own netflix shows.

That's your real network with real computers, and you want the govt to insure that you get lag free gaming.

Are you even aware that the FTC can still step in on a case by case basis if an ISP institutes some policy like this?

 

 

[JamesD]

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/technology/348529-after-the-fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-the-ftc-wont-leave

[TheTIGuy]

Hey jeeves, fetch more popcorn would ya?

And lotsa butter too!

[icemanxp300]

Phone? Who said anything about a phone? I use a device plugged into my router.

 

 

You are just unbelievable. Whether your signal travels through cellphone, tablet, or whatever else is really irrelevant. You are still using the same shitty wireless service.

 

 

As for your last argument... my ISP is VIAERO Wireless.

 

 

Who says you need cable or fiber? My broadband is 4G and a lowly 2MB/s. I can't download anything and everything or watch 4K HD video, but it's enough to stream lower quality 1080i (which is still really good) and 720p.

 

You enjoy that amazing service and speeds. Good thing you have choices, because when you use the bottom of the barrel ISP I guess you wouldn't have anything to lose and ANY other plan would likely be better for you.

 

What you are using would not work for my needs, plain and simple. The ONLY service that works for MY NEEDS is a cable line. Therefore I do not have "reasonable" choices. Unless I want to sacrifice my current internet lifestyle and simply browse the web.

 

This back and forth shit is annoying now. You say we have choices and you are 100% correct! We do have choices. I'm saying all the choices are shit and not really choices at all.

 

Could you race a Honda Civic against a Mclaren f1, of course you could but what's the point?

[marc.hull]

Greetings.

 

If you don't like your internet provider then change your internet provider. If you can't get a better service in your area then move to an area where you can get better service. If you can't move to a different area then adapt. Neither the government nor any business owes you internet conectivity per your specs (not intending to be a dick here but that is a fact.)

 

Lastly, what the hell is an internet lifestyle ?

[SignGuy81]

Neither the government nor any business owes you internet conectivity per your specs (not intending to be a dick here but that is a fact.)

 

 

 

Well, lets see. The government gives them permission to run their lines, power, telecommunications, cable, over and under our properties but I guess government has right of way. It isn't like they can allow 10 power companies for example to run 10 sets of power lines each of their own throughout neighborhoods so people can have competition, so therefore there is constantly battles over rate hikes because power companies who own a monopoly want to constantly raise rates to unreasonable levels. What if I don't want the lines going over my property do I have a say so? So I think it is fair that the government puts stipulations in place. I think it is owed.

Edited December 1, 2017 by SignGuy81

[icemanxp300]

Lastly, what the hell is an internet lifestyle ?

 

Definition of lifestyle:

 

"the typical way of life of an individual, group, or culture"

 

Therefore if I typically go online very day and play games that require high bandwidth or I stream movies/TV shows or just surf certain websites. That is my internet lifestyle.

 

 

Greetings.

 

If you don't like your internet provider then change your internet provider. If you can't get a better service in your area then move to an area where you can get better service. If you can't move to a different area then adapt.

 

You must have 3 Ph.D's to have such amazing insight and advice.

[Dripfree]

Iceman

 

I'm just hearing a lot of me! me! me! from you. I actually do know someone who moved because the local internet services could not meet his buisness needs. People are moving right now so they can live somewhere they can smoke pot. Others are moving to get away from potheads. The scenarios you are describing are purely recreational. The idea that you think your scenario warents government intervention is ludicrous. If you want to make a convincing argument do not argue your personal circumstances.

[marc.hull]

No PHD's here. I had never heard of an internet lifestyle per se hence my question. No need for the definition but thanks anyway.

 

I'm really trying my best not to call you a big pussy but your making it difficult.

 

How about this. You make the best of your situation like most people do. Good luck.

[SignGuy81]

I'm really trying my best not to call you a big pussy but your making it difficult.

 

 

 

I think that went a little to far