Net neutrality non-neutrality
-
@gąska said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
We call it "radio internet" in Poland
You can also do it with a laser, which is interesting. (One of our more rural offices had/has? such a link to an annex building.) Weather really fucks that up too, though, as I recall.
-
@masonwheeler said in In other news today...:
-
I wonder what they'll be restoring. @area_usa, what has changed in your internet usage in the last half year?
-
From here, the fight gets notably more difficult. The House also has to vote in favor of the CRA reversal, a tall order given the large number of breathleesly-loyal telecom industry House allies like Marsha Blackburn.
As opposed to rabid Netflix partisans like Techshit writers.
-
@gąska said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
I wonder what they'll be restoring. @area_usa, what has changed in your internet usage in the last half year?
Nothing. Because I'm locked into one provider. The FCC tried to outlaw that in 1998 if I recall, but there's the loophole that owners of MDUs (e.g. apartment complexes) have to allow installers access to the premises, so they can choose to only allow one provider's installers and deny all the others'. (I agree with the premise that the government shouldn't be able to tell the MDU owner what to do, but as with most things in government, the results are... sub-optimal.)
If we're going to be fixing FCC fuckups now, let's fix that.
-
@gąska said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
I wonder what they'll be restoring. @area_usa, what has changed in your internet usage in the last half year?
The local cable company's offerings seem to have improved a lot. Their best package used to be 30Mb but they're up to 100Mb now, so they are actually competitive with Verizon FiOS at this point.
-
@boomzilla said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
The local cable company's offerings seem to have improved a lot. Their best package used to be 30Mb but they're up to 100Mb now, so they are actually competitive with Verizon FiOS at this point.
I didn't really notice anything different. Shouldn't we have all died by now? What happened to Armageddon?
-
@antiquarian kinda hard for that to happen when the industry is spending so much time and money fighting the rest of the population at every step of this process. When the fight dies down you can bet those resources will go toward making fears come true.
-
@antiquarian said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
I didn't really notice anything different. Shouldn't we have all died by now? What happened to Armageddon?
The repeal of the rules hasn't actually taken effect yet, and when it does, the ISPs know full-well that they're on ridiculously shaky ground because everything about the repeal process was extremely sketchy and there's a good chance that none of it makes it past judicial review. So they're almost certainly going to be on their best behavior at first, to try to "prove" that things aren't really getting any worse for anyone, and give the public time to get complacent before they begin introducing harmful changes a little at a time.
Filed under: Boiling frogs
-
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@antiquarian said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
I didn't really notice anything different. Shouldn't we have all died by now? What happened to Armageddon?
The repeal of the rules hasn't actually taken effect yet
Oh, okay. Carry on then. I'll ask again in December.
the ISPs know full-well that they're on ridiculously shaky ground because everything about the repeal process was extremely sketchy
Wasn't it done in the exact same way that it was originally introduced? Wouldn't that make the rules themselves ridiculously shaky?
-
@lb_ said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
inda hard for that to happen when the industry is spending so much time and money fighting the rest of the population at every step of this process.
"The rest?"
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
he repeal of the rules hasn't actually taken effect yet, and when it does, the ISPs know full-well that they're on ridiculously shaky ground because everything about the repeal process was extremely sketchy and there's a good chance that none of it makes it past judicial review.
You gotta stop drinking your bathwater.
-
@boomzilla said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
"The rest?"
The approximately 85% of the American people who support net neutrality. Despite Comcast's cynical attempt to frame it as a partisan issue, it enjoys overwhelming support across the political spectrum.
You gotta stop drinking your bathwater.
Have you even been following the issue at all? Everything about the way Ajit Pai handled this stinks to high heaven.
-
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
The approximately 85% of the American people who support net neutrality. Despite Comcast's cynical attempt to frame it as a partisan issue, it enjoys overwhelming support across the political spectrum.
Sure, now ask them what they're supporting.
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
Have you even been following the issue at all? Everything about the way Ajit Pai handled this stinks to high heaven.
I haven't looked at it for a while, but aside from hysterical paranoids like you who are consistently wrong about nearly everything (just go back and reread this thread, for instance), no, I haven't heard anything that would make me think there was going to be any sort of "judicial review" that would toss it out.
-
@boomzilla said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
consistently wrong about nearly everything (just go back and reread this thread, for instance)
This coming from the guy who repeatedly asserts, in this very thread, that it's all about Netflix?
-
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@boomzilla said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
consistently wrong about nearly everything (just go back and reread this thread, for instance)
This coming from the guy who repeatedly asserts, in this very thread, that it's all about Netflix?
I see you haven't decided to start being right about stuff in this thread yet.
-
@boomzilla said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
I see you haven't decided to start being right about stuff in this thread yet.
/me points upthread a bit.
@boomzilla said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
As opposed to rabid Netflix partisans like Techshit writers.
You were saying?
-
@gąska said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
I wonder what they'll be restoring. @area_usa, what has changed in your internet usage in the last half year?
Nothing changed when net neutrality started, and nothing changed when it ended. The whole thing seems to be a waste of time, money, and emotional bandwidth on all sides.
-
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@boomzilla said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
I see you haven't decided to start being right about stuff in this thread yet.
/me points upthread a bit.
@boomzilla said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
As opposed to rabid Netflix partisans like Techshit writers.
You were saying?
I'm saying you're usually wrong. And that you're continuing to be wrong by "reading" a mocking joke to be something that it isn't when it insults your pet NN conspiracy bloggers.
-
@gąska said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
I wonder what they'll be restoring. @area_usa, what has changed in your internet usage in the last half year?
Finally getting gigabit in my neighborhood.
-
@mott555 said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@gąska said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
I wonder what they'll be restoring. @area_usa, what has changed in your internet usage in the last half year?
Nothing changed when net neutrality started, and nothing changed when it ended. The whole thing seems to be a waste of time, money, and emotional bandwidth on all sides.
Wow, I got a downvote because I wasn't dead before net neutrality came into effect, and I haven't died yet since it's going away.
-
@gąska said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@area_usa, what has changed in your internet usage in the last half year?
I guess I was wrong. ISPs are already starting to pull stupid shenanigans, and the new rules haven't even gone into effect yet!
-
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@gąska said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@area_usa, what has changed in your internet usage in the last half year?
I guess I was wrong. ISPs are already starting to pull stupid shenanigans, and the new rules haven't even gone into effect yet!
Or more precisely - they've been doing that in Feb 2017, back when there wasn't even any talk of repeal!
-
@gąska ...so you didn't read the article. Got it.
-
@masonwheeler did you? Because it's all about a breach of contract that occured in January 2017 and before, and the shitty provider grasping at straws to weasel out of the fact they made fake advertisements and sold services they couldn't deliver. The so-called-net-neutrality-rules repeal is simply the most convenient excuse at the moment - if FCC hasn't done it, they'd find another.
-
@gąska I suppose that's one interpretation. This doesn't change the fact that the NN repeal is the rationale they're using to try to get away with their bad behavior.
-
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@gąska I suppose that's one interpretation. This doesn't change the fact that the NN repeal is the rationale they're using to try to get away with their bad behavior.
My students make BS excuses all the time. If it wasn't one thing it'd be another. NN is completely irrelevant here.
-
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
This doesn't change the fact that the NN repeal is the rationale they're using to try to get away with their bad behavior.
If they used Mueller's investigation as their rationale, would you say Mueller's investigation is a mistake and negatively affects Americans?
-
@gąska said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
I wonder what they'll be restoring. @area_usa, what has changed in your internet usage in the last half year?
Starting a few days ago, I had horrible lag and packet loss when playing GW2 on a European account. (The servers are on EC2 for both NA and EU.)
This mysteriously stopped late last night.
-
@ben_lubar GDPR topic is that way :down_button:
-
@gąska said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
I wonder what they'll be restoring. @area_usa, what has changed in your internet usage in the last half year?
This is now the only site (basically) I've used, and even that is dropping off.
-
@gąska said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@ben_lubar GDPR topic is that way :down_button:
It's a weird setup. Both of my ArenaNet accounts are north american, but one account is in Gunnar's Hold, a European world and the other account is in Eredon Terrace, a North American world.
Eredon Terrace is canonically located in Asia.
Gunnar's Hold is located in... Eastern Russia, I guess?
-
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@gąska said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@area_usa, what has changed in your internet usage in the last half year?
I guess I was wrong. ISPs are already starting to pull stupid shenanigans, and the new rules haven't even gone into effect yet!
TRWTF is that you think the FCC should be policing misleading advertising.
-
@boomzilla I believe the Federal Communications Commission should be policing the communications industry, including fraud by members of the communications indutry. What's strange about that?
-
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@boomzilla I believe the Federal Communications Commission should be policing the communications industry, including fraud by members of the communications indutry. What's strange about that?
So you also think the FCC should collect their taxes? Monitor their workplace safety?
Your fanaticism is causing some interesting rationalizations.
-
@boomzilla said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
So you also think the FCC should collect their taxes? Monitor their workplace safety?
Did I say that?
-
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@boomzilla said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
So you also think the FCC should collect their taxes? Monitor their workplace safety?
Did I say that?
Did I say you said that?
No, I'm making fun of you for not seeing the obvious flaws in your rationalization.
-
@boomzilla OK, if you're going to be that ic about it, let's be equally clear, even though I should not have to clarify this: I believe the FCC should be policing the communications industry, specifically in their work of providing communications services.
Filed under: More arguing in bad faith
-
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
Filed under: More arguing in bad faith
So you're admitting it? Or you're just using this as an excuse to dismiss any disagreements?
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@boomzilla OK, if you're going to be that ic about it, let's be equally clear, even though I should not have to clarify this: I believe the FCC should be policing the communications industry, specifically in their work of providing communications services.
I think we can all agree that we wish you'd have to clarify your statements less frequently, but frankly I don't see you being willing to even admit that you have a problem, let alone trying to fix it.
And now we're back to the original rationalization regarding policing misleading advertising. Well done.
-
@boomzilla said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
regarding policing misleading advertising
You seem like you're trying to make some sort of point here, but I can't help but wonder what it is...
-
@masonwheeler his point is that it's not FCC's job to investigate, prosecute or punish companies for breach of contract and false advertising.
FTR, I don't necessarily agree with @boomzilla here. I don't know what FCC's mission is exactly. But I certainly disagree that repeal of so-called-net-neutrality has anything to do with this situation.
-
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@boomzilla said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
regarding policing misleading advertising
You seem like you're trying to make some sort of point here, but I can't help but wonder what it is...
I'm not surprised.
-
@masonwheeler said in In other news today...:
@djls45 said in In other news today...:
His prior employment would be a problem only if he was still getting paid by the companies that his agency regulates.
So the entirety of the human experience--the formation of personal ties and actual interests, just for starters--has nothing to do with conflicts of interest? Only money counts?
You're just angry because people disagree with you, so you blame corruption for lack of a better argument.
-
@gąska said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@masonwheeler his point is that it's not FCC's job to investigate, prosecute or punish companies for breach of contract and false advertising.
FTR, I don't necessarily agree with @boomzilla here. I don't know what FCC's mission is exactly. But I certainly disagree that repeal of so-called-net-neutrality has anything to do with this situation.
Specifically because it's the FTC's job to do that. Or other companies and the courts, in the case of false advertising.
-
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
Everything about the way Ajit Pai handled this stinks to high heaven.
And how has it been any different from when Wheeler and that group enacted these rules? Far as I can tell, procedure was followed. You can't have it both ways.
-
-
@benjamin-hall said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
Specifically because it's the FTC's job to do that.
Yeah, that's an argument that gets brought up a lot by people who don't know what AT&T has been up to lately.
Also, saying it like that seems to imply that a bad action can't be a violation of multiple different laws or regulations in multiple jurisdictions. While that may be ideal in some cases, in the real world things aren't that simple.
-
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@benjamin-hall said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
Specifically because it's the FTC's job to do that.
Yeah, that's an argument that gets brought up a lot by people who don't know what AT&T has been up to lately.
Also, saying it like that seems to imply that a bad action can't be a violation of multiple different laws or regulations in multiple jurisdictions. While that may be ideal in some cases, in the real world things aren't that simple.
Regardless, this has nothing to do with NN. NN is a smoke-screen here on a normal contract case.
-
@erufael said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
And how has it been any different from when Wheeler and that group enacted these rules?
In essentially every way.
Far as I can tell, procedure was followed. You can't have it both ways.
No. Pai et al made an absolute mockery of procedure at every step, which is why their repeal is now being or about to be challenged in court by approximately everyone.
-
@masonwheeler Specifics, please. The FCC is under no formal obligation (as far as I am aware) to comply with the will of the people. This is a rule change exactly like the change that caused this whole mess in the first place in 2015. So if this gets thrown out (it wont), then the 2015 change is also invalid.
-
@masonwheeler said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
@benjamin-hall said in Net neutrality non-neutrality:
Specifically because it's the FTC's job to do that.
Yeah, that's an argument that gets brought up a lot by people who don't know what AT&T has been up to lately.
TDEMSYR. No, seriously. Also, I love this bit, which is really pants on head retarded:
It's worth reiterating that even if the FTC wins this case, the agency remains a pale echo of the FCC when it comes to holding giant ISPs accountable. The FTC lacks rule-making authority
That's exactly what you want from an agency responsible for enforcing laws. They really earned their Techshit nickname.
Also, saying it like that seems to imply that a bad action can't be a violation of multiple different laws or regulations in multiple jurisdictions. While that may be ideal in some cases, in the real world things aren't that simple.
Why imply it? Yes, it is often bad to have that sort of thing from a single layer of government! Is white also black in your world?