Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality
-
@ben_lubar Does it transmit to your telephone, or to your computer? If the answer is the former, then it's a telephone service; if it's the latter, then it's an internet service. This has been Obvious Things; join us next week for more.
-
@pie_flavor What if your computer is your phone? What if your phone is your computer? Both are common scenarios handled by the same companies.
-
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar Does it transmit to your telephone, or to your computer? If the answer is the former, then it's a telephone service; if it's the latter, then it's an internet service. This has been Obvious Things; join us next week for more.
It transmits to both through the same wires. Is it a "computer" wire or a telephone wire?
-
@ben_lubar I'm not saying I support the decision. I don't. I think it's retarded for precisely that reason. But that doesn't excuse your arguments being wrong and stupid anyway.
-
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar I'm not saying I support the decision. I don't. I think it's retarded for precisely that reason. But that doesn't excuse your arguments being wrong and stupid anyway.
You've been arguing that Net Neutrality being repealed was a good thing until I pointed out that maybe it wasn't and now you're saying that I'm wrong but you agree with me?
-
@ben_lubar Yes.
Let's look at the acronym, shall we?
Internet
Service
Provider.They provide to you the service of internet. It makes no statement about the cables it passes through, because that'd be idiotic to regulate; an electrical signal is an electrical signal.
Shall we add 'must use different cables' to the NN regulations?
-
@captain Then it's a telco, and subject to telco regulations. I don't understand how this is so hard.
-
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@captain Then it's a telco, and subject to telco regulations. I don't understand how this is so hard.
Ok, so all I need to do is leave Google Hangouts running at all times and now AT&T is suddenly back to being covered by Title II?
-
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar I'm not saying I support the decision. I don't. I think it's retarded for precisely that reason. But that doesn't excuse your arguments being wrong and stupid anyway.
You've been arguing that Net Neutrality being repealed was a good thing until I pointed out that maybe it wasn't and now you're saying that I'm wrong but you agree with me?
Yes. You side with me in your value structure but are severely lacking in facts.
-
@pie_flavor You might be surprised to find out that the Communications Act of 1934 wasn't about telephone companies. It was about communications.
-
@ben_lubar AT&T is already covered by Title II. AT&T will always be covered by Title II. AT&T has always been covered by Title II.
Wanna know why?
Because they're a telco.I could rig up a bot to post my arguments for me; I just have to cycle through the same three posts here.
-
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar AT&T is already covered by Title II. AT&T will always be covered by Title II. AT&T has always been covered by Title II.
Wanna know why?
Because they're a telco.I could rig up a bot to post my arguments for me; I just have to cycle through the same three posts here.
Ok, now explain to me what your argument was earlier about Net Neutrality and which companies are affected by it.
Because I get internet service from AT&T through MilwaukeePC.
-
@captain said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@pie_flavor You might be surprised to find out that the Communications Act of 1934 wasn't about telephone companies. It was about communications.
Correct. It divided various titles of communications law. Shoehorning internet communications into Title II, which governed telephone communications, is the current topic of debate.
-
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@the_quiet_one We cobbled together net neutrality from spare parts by classifying ISPs as telcos. Telcos already had this regulation in place, and nobody's removing it; we're just no longer classifying ISPs as telcos. So links 1, 3, 4, and 5 are invalid.
Wrong. The reason they classified ISPs as telcos is because a court decision concluded that the regulations that prevented links 1-5 were invalid unless they put them under Title II. Therefore, those regulations not only aren't present anymore, but even if they wanted to, they cannot be legally enforced anymore.
-
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@captain said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@pie_flavor You might be surprised to find out that the Communications Act of 1934 wasn't about telephone companies. It was about communications.
Correct. It divided various titles of communications law. Shoehorning internet communications into Title II, which governed telephone communications,, is the current topic of debate.
You've repeatedly said that AT&T is covered by Title II and also that ISPs aren't ever covered by Title II. Could you clarify whether the telephone company that I'm getting internet from is an ISP?
-
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
Correct. It divided various titles of communications law. Shoehorning internet communications into Title II, which governed telephone communications, is the current topic of debate.
Title 2 didn't govern telephone companies. It governs common carriers and declared that telephone companies are common carriers.
-
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
No, they're run by crooks. They're the ones taking advantage of the idiots.
Please tell me you're going to stop supporting these "crook" companies! Think of all the laws they're breaking by lying to their customers!
It's impossible that ISPs could possibly be "crook" companies! Everyone knows that!
Selective quoting removes the to argument, I guess. But the crooks have less power when the market is freer. Like I said and you didn't quote, that's the narrative, anyway.
-
@the_quiet_one said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@the_quiet_one We cobbled together net neutrality from spare parts by classifying ISPs as telcos. Telcos already had this regulation in place, and nobody's removing it; we're just no longer classifying ISPs as telcos. So links 1, 3, 4, and 5 are invalid.
Wrong. The reason they classified ISPs as telcos is because a court decision concluded that the regulations that prevented links 1-5 were invalid unless they put them under Title II. Therefore, those regulations cannot be legally enforced anymore.
You say 'wrong', and then proceed to state a bunch of things which don't actually mean I'm wrong.
-
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
But the crooks have less power when the market is freer.
Yes, let's assume that the crooks want a less free market and also want ISPs to not be able to make the market less free.
-
@captain A functionally useless .
-
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@the_quiet_one said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@the_quiet_one We cobbled together net neutrality from spare parts by classifying ISPs as telcos. Telcos already had this regulation in place, and nobody's removing it; we're just no longer classifying ISPs as telcos. So links 1, 3, 4, and 5 are invalid.
Wrong. The reason they classified ISPs as telcos is because a court decision concluded that the regulations that prevented links 1-5 were invalid unless they put them under Title II. Therefore, those regulations cannot be legally enforced anymore.
You say 'wrong', and then proceed to state a bunch of things which don't actually mean I'm wrong.
You say "and then proceed to state a bunch of things which don't actually mean I'm wrong" but that's the opposite of what the post you quoted did.
-
@the_quiet_one said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
Then why has stuff like this happened before before the FCC told them to stop on grounds of net neutrality?
Because those are different things?
-
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@captain said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@pie_flavor You might be surprised to find out that the Communications Act of 1934 wasn't about telephone companies. It was about communications.
Correct. It divided various titles of communications law. Shoehorning internet communications into Title II, which governed telephone communications,, is the current topic of debate.
You've repeatedly said that AT&T is covered by Title II and also that ISPs aren't ever covered by Title II. Could you clarify whether the telephone company that I'm getting internet from is an ISP?
Telcos are common carriers. Telcos that are also ISPs perfectly fit the 'common' adjective for 'common carrier'. ISPs that are not telcos should not be classified the same as telcos.
-
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@captain said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@pie_flavor You might be surprised to find out that the Communications Act of 1934 wasn't about telephone companies. It was about communications.
Correct. It divided various titles of communications law. Shoehorning internet communications into Title II, which governed telephone communications,, is the current topic of debate.
You've repeatedly said that AT&T is covered by Title II and also that ISPs aren't ever covered by Title II. Could you clarify whether the telephone company that I'm getting internet from is an ISP?
Telcos are common carriers. Telcos that are also ISPs perfectly fit the 'common' adjective for 'common carrier'. ISPs that are not telcos should not be classified the same as telcos.
What the hell is the difference between internet provided by a company that also sells telephones and internet provided by a hot dog stand? Both should be covered by the same set of regulations about what they can do to the internet access they provide.
-
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@boomzilla said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@boomzilla If net neutrality wasn't a big deal, why would basically everyone who isn't being paid by an ISP be against its repeal?
Are you saying that they're going to send me a check? Sweeeet.
Also, as I said around here somewhere: "A country full of idiots." Or anyways, a lot of low information people and a lot of conspiratorial people.
I assume that means that companies like Netflix, Microsoft, Amazon, and all of these are run by idiots too?
Probably.
Are you saying that somehow you are the only non-idiot? Some random person on a web forum is smarter than the biggest internet companies in the world?
Never go full Pauline Kael.
-
@boomzilla said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@boomzilla said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@boomzilla If net neutrality wasn't a big deal, why would basically everyone who isn't being paid by an ISP be against its repeal?
Are you saying that they're going to send me a check? Sweeeet.
Also, as I said around here somewhere: "A country full of idiots." Or anyways, a lot of low information people and a lot of conspiratorial people.
I assume that means that companies like Netflix, Microsoft, Amazon, and all of these are run by idiots too?
Probably.
Are you saying that somehow you are the only non-idiot? Some random person on a web forum is smarter than the biggest internet companies in the world?
Never go full Pauline Kael.
So your argument is "everyone in the world is an idiot, therefore nobody can be more wrong than anyone else"?
-
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@the_quiet_one said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@the_quiet_one We cobbled together net neutrality from spare parts by classifying ISPs as telcos. Telcos already had this regulation in place, and nobody's removing it; we're just no longer classifying ISPs as telcos. So links 1, 3, 4, and 5 are invalid.
Wrong. The reason they classified ISPs as telcos is because a court decision concluded that the regulations that prevented links 1-5 were invalid unless they put them under Title II. Therefore, those regulations cannot be legally enforced anymore.
You say 'wrong', and then proceed to state a bunch of things which don't actually mean I'm wrong.
Let me word my statement differently because clearly you didn't understand.
Before 2014: Links 1-5 occur. FCC strikes them down on net neutrality.
2014: Verizon challenges FCC on their ability to enforce net neutrality. Court rules that FCC cannot enforce those rules unless they consider ISPs telcos. FCC makes a decision to do so, which preserves net neutrality.
Today: FCC decides to no longer consider ISPs as telcos... thereby making the 2014 court decision preventing net neutrality rules from being enforceable back to the defacto law that would make the FCC powerless in challenging the events in links 1-5.
-
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
I'm getting internet from is an ISP?
Telcos are common carriers. Telcos that are also ISPs perfectly fit the 'common' adjective for 'common carrier'. ISPs that are not telcos should not be classified the same as telcos.
A common carrier in common law countries (corresponding to a public carrier in civil law systems,[1] usually called simply a carrier) is a person or company that transports goods or people for any person or company and that is responsible for any possible loss of the goods during transport.[2]
-
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
if they classify ISPs as Title II.
Congress passed the law to classify ISPs as Title I. Congress did not delegate their classification authority to the FCC. The court did not say the FCC had authority to classify ISPs as Title II, but did note that the regulations it was declaring illegal wouldn't be illegal if ISPs were classified as Title II. The FCC went "hold my beer" with the 2015 Open Internet Order for a patently illegal power grab. It matters if the reclassification is upheld, because the Title II regulations that the FCC went "nudge, nudge, wink, wink, we won't enforce these" are very intrusive, costly to comply with, and based on an era well before the internet that is not well suited to regulating the service ISPs provide.
If NN proponents attain a legislative update to the regulatory framework that preserves NN, that's one thing. Back door power grabs by unelected officials (who may not even be fireable by the President, as ex-Chairman Wheeler toyed with early this year) are not good for the Internet, the rule of law, or the American consumer.
-
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@captain said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@pie_flavor You might be surprised to find out that the Communications Act of 1934 wasn't about telephone companies. It was about communications.
Correct. It divided various titles of communications law. Shoehorning internet communications into Title II, which governed telephone communications,, is the current topic of debate.
You've repeatedly said that AT&T is covered by Title II and also that ISPs aren't ever covered by Title II. Could you clarify whether the telephone company that I'm getting internet from is an ISP?
Telcos are common carriers. Telcos that are also ISPs perfectly fit the 'common' adjective for 'common carrier'. ISPs that are not telcos should not be classified the same as telcos.
What the hell is the difference between internet provided by a company that also sells telephones and internet provided by a hot dog stand? Both should be covered by the same set of regulations about what they can do to the internet access they provide.
Right, but the categories are still done wrong, because some of those regulations are to do with telcos and some are to do with internets.
-
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
I see a lot of arguments from various anti-Net Neutrality people saying that nothing will change as a result of Net Neutrality being repealed.
My question to them: Why would it be so important to repeal Net Neutrality that they had to do it even though nothing would change and 80% of the population of the country were telling them not to do it?
I think that not a lot will change. Obviously, different laws allow different behavior. I can't argue against a vague generality, but if I had to make something up to "defend" against something so amorphous, I'd guess that they were being a bit hyperbolic in countering the hyperbolic apocalyptic claims being made.
The reason ISPs are classified as Title II in the first place is that the FCC was told by a court that Net Neutrality is only enforceable if they classify ISPs as Title II.
Yes.
-
@izzion said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
if they classify ISPs as Title II.
Congress passed the law to classify ISPs as Title I. Congress did not delegate their classification authority to the FCC. The court did not say the FCC had authority to classify ISPs as Title II, but did note that the regulations it was declaring illegal wouldn't be illegal if ISPs were classified as Title II. The FCC went "hold my beer" with the 2015 Open Internet Order for a patently illegal power grab. It matters if the reclassification is upheld, because the Title II regulations that the FCC went "nudge, nudge, wink, wink, we won't enforce these" are very intrusive, costly to comply with, and based on an era well before the internet that is not well suited to regulating the service ISPs provide.
If NN proponents attain a legislative update to the regulatory framework that preserves NN, that's one thing. Back door power grabs by unelected officials (who may not even be fireable by the President, as ex-Chairman Wheeler toyed with early this year) are not good for the Internet, the rule of law, or the American consumer.
If your argument is that the FCC doesn't have the authority to decide that ISPs are in Title II, wouldn't it also be fair to say that the FCC doesn't have the authority to decide that ISPs are not in Title II?
-
@pie_flavor They're all about common carriers.
-
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@captain Like I said. New laws. Not shoehorning new concepts into old and outdated laws.
So the logical way to make new laws is to throw out the old ones and then maybe think about making new ones? Where have I heard that idea before?
I've said it, for sure. Maybe you've been reading my posts?
-
@ben_lubar I guess if you sort of
squint at itshred it, soak it in water, and take it to a tea leaves reader fortune teller?
-
@captain They're under the title, yes. They are not all related. or created with the same intent.
-
@pie_flavor The intent is to sell internet access. That's why the companies made a product out of internet access.
-
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@captain They're under the title, yes. They are not all related. or created with the same intent.
Are you just saying words without thinking about what they mean? If a law is under a category of laws, that's the same thing as the law being related to the category.
-
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@boomzilla said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@boomzilla said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@boomzilla If net neutrality wasn't a big deal, why would basically everyone who isn't being paid by an ISP be against its repeal?
Are you saying that they're going to send me a check? Sweeeet.
Also, as I said around here somewhere: "A country full of idiots." Or anyways, a lot of low information people and a lot of conspiratorial people.
I assume that means that companies like Netflix, Microsoft, Amazon, and all of these are run by idiots too?
Probably.
Are you saying that somehow you are the only non-idiot? Some random person on a web forum is smarter than the biggest internet companies in the world?
Never go full Pauline Kael.
So your argument is "everyone in the world is an idiot, therefore nobody can be more wrong than anyone else"?
Only when you imagine what I wrote instead of reading what I wrote, I suspect.
-
@boomzilla said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@boomzilla said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@boomzilla said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@boomzilla If net neutrality wasn't a big deal, why would basically everyone who isn't being paid by an ISP be against its repeal?
Are you saying that they're going to send me a check? Sweeeet.
Also, as I said around here somewhere: "A country full of idiots." Or anyways, a lot of low information people and a lot of conspiratorial people.
I assume that means that companies like Netflix, Microsoft, Amazon, and all of these are run by idiots too?
Probably.
Are you saying that somehow you are the only non-idiot? Some random person on a web forum is smarter than the biggest internet companies in the world?
Never go full Pauline Kael.
So your argument is "everyone in the world is an idiot, therefore nobody can be more wrong than anyone else"?
Only when you imagine what I wrote instead of reading what I wrote, I suspect.
You wrote "Probably" and then someone's name I don't recognize.
-
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@pie_flavor said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@captain They're under the title, yes. They are not all related. or created with the same intent.
Are you just saying words without thinking about what they mean? If a law is under a category of laws, that's the same thing as the law being related to the category.
Are you just saying words without thinking about what they mean?
This is a combined category of laws, where telephone-related regulations and internet-related regulations are all agglomerated together under one big umbrella. Also known as 'the wrong way to do things'.
-
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@izzion said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
if they classify ISPs as Title II.
Congress passed the law to classify ISPs as Title I. Congress did not delegate their classification authority to the FCC. The court did not say the FCC had authority to classify ISPs as Title II, but did note that the regulations it was declaring illegal wouldn't be illegal if ISPs were classified as Title II. The FCC went "hold my beer" with the 2015 Open Internet Order for a patently illegal power grab. It matters if the reclassification is upheld, because the Title II regulations that the FCC went "nudge, nudge, wink, wink, we won't enforce these" are very intrusive, costly to comply with, and based on an era well before the internet that is not well suited to regulating the service ISPs provide.
If NN proponents attain a legislative update to the regulatory framework that preserves NN, that's one thing. Back door power grabs by unelected officials (who may not even be fireable by the President, as ex-Chairman Wheeler toyed with early this year) are not good for the Internet, the rule of law, or the American consumer.
If your argument is that the FCC doesn't have the authority to decide that ISPs are in Title II, wouldn't it also be fair to say that the FCC doesn't have the authority to decide that ISPs are not in Title II?
Yes, that would be my argument. So the current action wouldn't have happened because the 2015 action was illegal. Courts do all kinds of shit that defies reason and the plain text of laws.
-
@boomzilla said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
So the current action wouldn't have happened because the 2015 action was illegal.
The current action did happen, so are you saying that the FCC broke the law for literally no reason just to annoy liberals?
-
@ben_lubar
So if the Minneapolis Transit Authority passes a regulation that reclassifies homeless people so they can steal your wallet without legal consequences, because you're better off then they are, and you finally manage to get a new administration in there that realizes that regulation was illegal, they can't do anything about it because they don't have the right to classify homeless people either?
-
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@boomzilla said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@boomzilla said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@boomzilla said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@boomzilla If net neutrality wasn't a big deal, why would basically everyone who isn't being paid by an ISP be against its repeal?
Are you saying that they're going to send me a check? Sweeeet.
Also, as I said around here somewhere: "A country full of idiots." Or anyways, a lot of low information people and a lot of conspiratorial people.
I assume that means that companies like Netflix, Microsoft, Amazon, and all of these are run by idiots too?
Probably.
Are you saying that somehow you are the only non-idiot? Some random person on a web forum is smarter than the biggest internet companies in the world?
Never go full Pauline Kael.
So your argument is "everyone in the world is an idiot, therefore nobody can be more wrong than anyone else"?
Only when you imagine what I wrote instead of reading what I wrote, I suspect.
You wrote "Probably" and then someone's name I don't recognize.
Well, yeah, my starting assumption with respect to any given person is that I'm smarter than him.
-
@boomzilla said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@the_quiet_one said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
Then why has stuff like this happened before before the FCC told them to stop on grounds of net neutrality?
Because those are different things?
It's part of the concerns NN supporters believe is going to happen very soon after today, and history has proven them right.
-
@ben_lubar
No, the FCC pre-empted wasting lots of your money trying to defend lawsuits against the 2015 OIO by mooting it.
-
@izzion said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar
So if the Minneapolis Transit Authority passes a regulation that reclassifies homeless people so they can steal your wallet without legal consequences, because you're better off then they are, and you finally manage to get a new administration in there that realizes that regulation was illegal, they can't do anything about it because they don't have the right to classify homeless people either?The correct action if you see that someone has overstepped their constitutional boundaries is to get the supreme court involved.
If someone robs a bank, are you the kind of person who would call the police or the kind of person who would go steal money from a different bank and put it in the first bank?
-
@izzion said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
@ben_lubar
No, the FCC pre-empted wasting lots of your money trying to defend lawsuits against the 2015 OIO by mooting it.I didn't hear a single mention of "the FCC didn't have the authority to do that" from the current FCC, so I'm going to assume they do at least think they have the authority.
-
@erufael said in Benefits of the repeal of Net Neutrality:
I think that's gonna be the best part. So sick of arguing about it with everyone; no one has a damn clue what any of this actually means.
Yes, we do, because we saw what happened before the rules were put in place.
The best way to predict the future is usually to look at the past, and in this case the past gives us a pretty clear (and very ugly) guide.