This should scare you.
- Started
- Last post
- 17 Responses
- UKV
Current rulings on net neutrality saying the FCC doesn't have the authority to mandate that Comcast not throttle or otherwise mess with their network connections... gives internet providers control to block or give access to any sites they want which could lead to a situation where internet sites are treated as channels.
- sequoia0
dear god no
- dbloc0
it's the new cable
- UKV0
hah, wonder what I would pay to visit QBN?
- dbloc0
won;t competition keep that from happening...unless all providers team up
- sequoia0
"won't competition keep that from happening"
What if there's no competition? I'm in an area where there's only one high speed provider....
- scarabin0
we need to take ISP into our own hands
- UKV0
Not sure how this would affect everything, but I think Google wants broadband treated like a utility, and is going so far as to prototype it:
- acescence0
the FCC is trying to reclassify ISPs to get around this ruling
- acescence0
this Lawrence Lessig talk on broadband, cybersecurity, and copyright is excellent...
- UKV0
acescene, that link is fantastic. thanks.
- ukit0
This is relatively old news
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/20…
http://www.qbn.com/topics/629978…
But after reading up on it a bit after that post, there may actually be a silver lining in that this ruling could ultimately prompt the government to either a) get Congress to pay a new law giving the FCC that authority (sadly unlikely) or b) simply have the FCC to reclassify ISPs as a new, more heavily regulated type of business altogether. The second course of action is the worst possible outcome for the big ISPs altogether, but ironically might be what happen if the other options fail.
All in all we should be glad Obama appointed people at the FCC that even give a shit about net neutrality, most Republicans and a lot of Democrats too would have long ago happily tossed all of this out the window to give the providers everything they wanted.
- UKV0
The price we pay is just ridiculous, and I really hope Google shakes things up.
- ukit0
- SigDesign0
It doesn't make much sense... so, if you published your own site, you'd have to put it under Comcast's "Games" channel or something? This would be incredibly complicated...
Comcast is big, but I don't think they'll be able to have the power to do anything like that alone. I, like many other people, got off the Comcast boat as soon as I possibly could, to another ISP.
- they probably wouldn't care about your website. But accessing cnn or youtube - might cost money...like adding HBOpersona_non_grata
- HBO and Showtimepersona_non_grata
- ukit0
That graphic is an exaggeration...but there's no doubt the ISPs would like more control over who gets access to what. The case that was recently brought was over the issue of them slowing down Bittorrent traffic on a large scale. Also keep in mind many of these ISPs are parts of larger conglomerates that also own media and entertainment companies as well as other businesses, so there's a big conflict of interest there.
- yeah it could get out of hand quickly...SigDesign
- +1persona_non_grata
- BRNK0
I think ukit is on point. I would bet that we'l see throttling of companies' competitors- something the average internet user would never notice- rather than straight up blocking sites. I bet their aiming for "Ugh, google takes forever, but bing is superfast." rather than "What!? I can't get to google!?"
- ug I fucked up "they're" ..one of my worst pet peeves! Also, "We'll".BRNK
- +1persona_non_grata