Net Neutrality...

[tower912]

Don't worry, there will be a few oversized charts coming soon to explain why we're all wrong.
Also, infowars hyperlinks.

Whatever Moscow provides. 

[#TheThing]

You are actually CONSUMING something when you pay for power and water. When you pay for data, NOTHING is consumed.  A much better example of the internet are state and federal roads.  We don't pay per mile, we pay for the service... since that's what it is.

There should be no change in how internet is brought into people's homes.  NO to throttling, NO to content blocking, and NO to forced advertisement. 

With the greatest respect, this could not be more wrong.  When you pay for data, NOTHING is consumed?  Data isn't without properties that fill capacity.  This is what network engineers do, they help solve and push data through a network path.  This is why there is capacity.

I'm not sure why you indicated you are not consuming anything?  You very much are consuming something, data.  In the form of bits (millions of them) per second.  The pipes which carry that data has limits in terms of volumes and organization, it doesn't just happen. 

Jesu listed a bunch of items that ISPs stopped or slowed in years past.  If one looks at his list, it is ancient by networking standards.  Years old.  It also was done for a reason, because of capacity constraints.  The consumption of data has accelerated to unbelievable amounts each and every year, especially with video and everyone having handsets.  ISPs had to put some gating on it to allow the free flow of data.

The more data that flows, the more capacity is needed. That takes investment and investment slowed in 2015 after the Obama administration rules were put into place.

What you want, no throttling, no gatekeeping, free data flow until your heart desires is NOT POSSIBLE without infrastructure investment by ISPs.  Which is why you should be doing backflips over this announcement. 

This is purely a theory, but I truly believe many of you just have no idea what net neutrality really is based on what benefits or outcomes you want.  If you want those outcomes, then you wouldn't be desiring a system that SLOWS investment and expansion into the capacity needed for all the data consumption you want.  And yes, that consumption is massive and to suggest NOTHING is consumed is an amazing statement. 

[#UnleashSean]

Now just let me say I'm fairly conservative in a lot of things. Gun rights, pc culture, taxes, some health care issues etc... But if I'm opposed 100% to the bill of net neutrality that should tell the rest of you something.

[#TheThing]

Now just let me say I'm fairly conservative in a lot of things. Gun rights, pc culture, taxes, some health care issues etc... But if I'm opposed 100% to the bill of net neutrality that should tell the rest of you something.

It is interesting and leads me to ask the questions.

1) What do you want?
2) Is what you want possible without investment and capacity expansion?
3) if capacity expansion is needed to fill your want (#1), will that happen more or less likely with net neutrality?

If we can break it down into those core questions and then add a fourth/fifth.  How much capital will be needed to achieve #1 and who pays for it that should get you some answers.

Everyone wants fast internet, no throttling, the ability to consume to no end.  Can we all agree to this?   How does one get there knowing towers have to be built, ditches dug, fiber laid, compression schemed improved, over a massive footprint to handle billions of devices (iOT) and future peak data consumption patterns?  When 4K becomes the norm, then 8K, the future projections of data are unfathomable already.

The end state we all want, yes?  Net Neutrality slows that achievement considerably in my opinion.  I believe in regulation here, but it is more in terms of regulation to prevent companies from reading data, sharing data, and so forth. In terms of capacity expansion, net neutrality has already proven a bad idea.  Could small data companies be hurt by new rules? Yes they can.  There are winners and losers with any of these decisions, that is a fact of life. 

[jesmu84]

It is interesting and leads me to ask the questions.

1) What do you want?
2) Is what you want possible without investment and capacity expansion?
3) if capacity expansion is needed to fill your want (#1), will that happen more or less likely with net neutrality?

If we can break it down into those core questions and then add a fourth/fifth.  How much capital will be needed to achieve #1 and who pays for it that should get you some answers.

Everyone wants fast internet, no throttling, the ability to consume to no end.  Can we all agree to this?   How does one get there knowing towers have to be built, ditches dug, fiber laid, compression schemed improved, over a massive footprint to handle billions of devices (iOT) and future peak data consumption patterns?  When 4K becomes the norm, then 8K, the future projections of data are unfathomable already.

The end state we all want, yes?  Net Neutrality slows that achievement considerably in my opinion.  I believe in regulation here, but it is more in terms of regulation to prevent companies from reading data, sharing data, and so forth. In terms of capacity expansion, net neutrality has already proven a bad idea.  Could small data companies be hurt by new rules? Yes they can.  There are winners and losers with any of these decisions, that is a fact of life.

You keep talking about expansion. Well, maybe these companies would be better believed in their goals had they used the 400 billion already given to them.

Also, do they necessarily need to invade everyone's privacy and have the ability to throttle and control the internet (and people's access to websites at the provider's discretion) to get the money that they so desperately need for continued building/upgrading? Or could they use what they have? Or maybe even increase prices further while maintaining an open internet?

I mean, if these companies need more money for expanding/upgrading, then just increase service price. Isn't that what they want? More money?

[Tugg Speedman]

Now just let me say I'm fairly conservative in a lot of things. Gun rights, pc culture, taxes, some health care issues etc... But if I'm opposed 100% to the bill of net neutrality that should tell the rest of you something.

Yes, that you have a basic misunderstanding of economics and this issue.

[MU82]

There you have it ... the guy who knows everything about everything is still in the house.

Actually, both of them are, including one who has been banned eleventy million TYMES.

They're right, everybody else is wrong! Always and forever!

Seems impossible, I know, but the rest of us have to face facts.

[Jay Bee]

This isn't gonna mess up the loads of free pr0n currently available, is it? That would blow, aina

[GB Warrior]

I mean, if these companies need more money for expanding/upgrading, then just increase service price. Isn't that what they want? More money?

The benefit is they now get a second revenue stream from B2B, in addition to being able to jack up prices on consumers

[g0lden3agle]

There is no "clog" in the bandwidth. Only ISP artifically created ones. ROFL you're dumb or ignorant.

Doesn't the physical hardware/wiring/infrastructure used to provide us internet have some sort of actual bandwidth limitations? 

[Tugg Speedman]

There you have it ... the guy who knows everything about everything is still in the house.

Actually, both of them are, including one who has been banned eleventy million TYMES.

They're right, everybody else is wrong! Always and forever!

Seems impossible, I know, but the rest of us have to face facts.

What are we wrong about and what are you right about?

Explain it to me like you would to a child.

[MU82]

What are we wrong about and what are you right about?

Explain it to me like you would to a child.

Already been explained several times in this thread.

[#UnleashSean]

Doesn't the physical hardware/wiring/infrastructure used to provide us internet have some sort of actual bandwidth limitations?

It does, and we don't come close to consuming it.

Both chicos and 21 don't understand how internet works.

They laminate how people watching "porn" and netflix hog the internet but fail to understand how it works.


I pay 45 dollars for 100mb/s, some pay 50 for 1 gig/s and other 50 for 50mb/s. This means that I have a cap of 100mb/s. I can watch all the porn, netflix, hulu. basketball, etc my heart desires. If I step over 100mb/s then my internet slows and throttles. Both of these idiots laminate how I am hogging the internet they "paid" for. When in fact, I have already paid for how much I use it. The moment i exceed how much I pay for it, the ISP will shut that crap down automatically within .5 of a second.

If I exceed the 100mb/s transfer my internet will die until I go under it. This makes sense. Net neutrality regulation has ZERO to do with "clogging" or "expansion" (google already proved this in Texas where comcast sued them because comcast wasn't willing to compete with googles gigabyte). Net neutrality has everything to do with ISP's trying to bleed Americans for all that they are worth. ISP's were given billiosn to "Expand" their pipes into gigabytes. They pocketed this money and didn't rent a single shovel to improve.

Any time any company/city tries to improve the pipes and expand their own ip's they are sued and ISP's attempt to stop them from doing so. Just google and City, TDS, Google, ETC that attempts to put gigabyte internet into community's and see how ridiculous the ISP's are. They literally sue cities into submission to not put internet of their own (Which is 30x better) so they do not have to compete. This isn't opinion this is complete fact.

[g0lden3agle]

It does, and we don't come close to consuming it.

Both chicos and 21 don't understand how internet works.

They laminate how people watching "porn" and netflix hog the internet but fail to understand how it works.


I pay 45 dollars for 100mb/s, some pay 50 for 1 gig/s and other 50 for 50mb/s. This means that I have a cap of 100mb/s. I can watch all the porn, netflix, hulu. basketball, etc my heart desires. If I step over 100mb/s then my internet slows and throttles. Both of these idiots laminate how I am hogging the internet they "paid" for. When in fact, I have already paid for how much I use it. The moment i exceed how much I pay for it, the ISP will shut that crap down automatically within .5 of a second.

If I exceed the 100mb/s transfer my internet will die until I go under it. This makes sense. Net neutrality regulation has ZERO to do with "clogging" or "expansion" (google already proved this in Texas where comcast sued them because comcast wasn't willing to compete with googles gigabyte). Net neutrality has everything to do with ISP's trying to bleed Americans for all that they are worth. ISP's were given billiosn to "Expand" their pipes into gigabytes. They pocketed this money and didn't rent a single shovel to improve.

Any time any company/city tries to improve the pipes and expand their own ip's they are sued and ISP's attempt to stop them from doing so. Just google and City, TDS, Google, ETC that attempts to put gigabyte internet into community's and see how ridiculous the ISP's are. They literally sue cities into submission to not put internet of their own (Which is 30x better) so they do not have to compete. This isn't opinion this is complete fact.

Ok this all makes sense, thanks!

[77ncaachamps]

How will encourage growth into the rural parts of America where the "pipes" are few and far between?

Any projections on how this will affect Google's plans on fibering more towns?

[naginiF]

It does, and we don't come close to consuming it.

Both chicos and 21 don't understand how internet works.

They laminate how people watching "porn" and netflix hog the internet but fail to understand how it works.


I pay 45 dollars for 100mb/s, some pay 50 for 1 gig/s and other 50 for 50mb/s. This means that I have a cap of 100mb/s. I can watch all the porn, netflix, hulu. basketball, etc my heart desires. If I step over 100mb/s then my internet slows and throttles. Both of these idiots laminate how I am hogging the internet they "paid" for. When in fact, I have already paid for how much I use it. The moment i exceed how much I pay for it, the ISP will shut that crap down automatically within .5 of a second.

If I exceed the 100mb/s transfer my internet will die until I go under it. This makes sense. Net neutrality regulation has ZERO to do with "clogging" or "expansion" (google already proved this in Texas where comcast sued them because comcast wasn't willing to compete with googles gigabyte). Net neutrality has everything to do with ISP's trying to bleed Americans for all that they are worth. ISP's were given billiosn to "Expand" their pipes into gigabytes. They pocketed this money and didn't rent a single shovel to improve.

Any time any company/city tries to improve the pipes and expand their own ip's they are sued and ISP's attempt to stop them from doing so. Just google and City, TDS, Google, ETC that attempts to put gigabyte internet into community's and see how ridiculous the ISP's are. They literally sue cities into submission to not put internet of their own (Which is 30x better) so they do not have to compete. This isn't opinion this is complete fact.

The only caveat i'd put on this is that if you are talking only wireless data consumption the conversation is different.  A small group of people can impact the experience of the rest of the folks by what they are doing with the shared "pipe".  However, that impact is always limited to specific towers (as they are just the terminus for the physical pipe) and therefore would only impact a small group of end consumers.  depending on your plan/carrier that person could get throttled and their impact limited as you stated.  Also, the managing the impact of heavy consumption is not wholesale infrastructure investment, it is managing a small percentage of consumer behavior.

On the home ISP side, as always, it's good to live in a Google Fiberhood. 

[Tugg Speedman]

How will encourage growth into the rural parts of America where the "pipes" are few and far between?

Any projections on how this will affect Google's plans on fibering more towns?

Wireless!

LTE now and 5G in the next few years (10 gig/s on your phone).

https://www.wired.com/2017/02/what-is-5g-and-when-do-i-get-it/

And why will 5G be needed?  From the link ...

5G is about more than just shuttling GBs to and from your iPhone more quickly. The 5G revolution will cast a much wider net. It's an information conduit being built to connect self-driving cars, VR headsets, delivery drones, and billions of interconnected devices inside the home.

5G is an incredibly expensive build-out.  All the money paid to date on access will not help with this.  Abolishing Net Neutrality will help create an equitable way to pay for this build-out.


The pipes will be obsolete in a few years.

[jesmu84]

Wireless!

LTE now and 5G in the next few years (10 gig/s on your phone).

https://www.wired.com/2017/02/what-is-5g-and-when-do-i-get-it/

And why will 5G be needed?  From the link ...

5G is about more than just shuttling GBs to and from your iPhone more quickly. The 5G revolution will cast a much wider net. It's an information conduit being built to connect self-driving cars, VR headsets, delivery drones, and billions of interconnected devices inside the home.

5G is an incredibly expensive build-out.  All the money paid to date on access will not help with this.  Abolishing Net Neutrality will help create an equitable way to pay for this build-out.


The pipes will be obsolete in a few years.

If they need more money, just raise prices. Don't need to control where I go on the web. Everyone wins

[Tugg Speedman]

It does, and we don't come close to consuming it.

Both chicos and 21 don't understand how internet works.

They laminate how people watching "porn" and netflix hog the internet but fail to understand how it works.


I pay 45 dollars for 100mb/s, some pay 50 for 1 gig/s and other 50 for 50mb/s. This means that I have a cap of 100mb/s. I can watch all the porn, netflix, hulu. basketball, etc my heart desires. If I step over 100mb/s then my internet slows and throttles. Both of these idiots laminate how I am hogging the internet they "paid" for. When in fact, I have already paid for how much I use it. The moment i exceed how much I pay for it, the ISP will shut that crap down automatically within .5 of a second.

If I exceed the 100mb/s transfer my internet will die until I go under it. This makes sense. Net neutrality regulation has ZERO to do with "clogging" or "expansion" (google already proved this in Texas where comcast sued them because comcast wasn't willing to compete with googles gigabyte). Net neutrality has everything to do with ISP's trying to bleed Americans for all that they are worth. ISP's were given billiosn to "Expand" their pipes into gigabytes. They pocketed this money and didn't rent a single shovel to improve.

Any time any company/city tries to improve the pipes and expand their own ip's they are sued and ISP's attempt to stop them from doing so. Just google and City, TDS, Google, ETC that attempts to put gigabyte internet into community's and see how ridiculous the ISP's are. They literally sue cities into submission to not put internet of their own (Which is 30x better) so they do not have to compete. This isn't opinion this is complete fact.

You have the wrong POV.

 The "bottleneck" is at the server/IP shoving data out to consumers.  So it's not about the size of the pipe you have into your house, it is the amount of data and the size of the pipe leaving your ISP. (Home speeds are greatly over-rated. For 99% of consumers, 50 MiPS is fine.  Google Fiber does change anything).

And with the "Internet of things," cloud computing, driverless cars, VR and AR coming, the amount of data flowing through your ISP is growing at Moore's law (doubling every 18 months).  They have to keep spending a lot to keep up.  And the desire for everything to be mobile means the wires into your house will not be needed in 5 to 10 years.  So all this info has to go over-the-air. 

Why not repeal Net Neutrality and have the VR/AR crowd, the driverless crowd and the cloud crowd pay for this massive build-out.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joshsteimle/2014/05/14/am-i-the-only-techie-against-net-neutrality/#b5c8b6570d51

Internet bandwidth is, at least currently, a finite resource and has to be allocated somehow. We can let politicians decide, or we can let you and me decide by leaving it up to the free market. If we choose politicians, we will see the Internet become another mismanaged public monopoly, subject to political whims and increased scrutiny from our friends at the NSA. If we leave it up to the free market we will, in time, receive more of what we want at a lower price. It may not be a perfect process, but it will be better than the alternative.

[Tugg Speedman]

If they need more money, just raise prices. Don't need to control where I go on the web. Everyone wins

See, this is the mistake you and everyone for Net Neutrality here makes.  They are not censoring you.  They don't care what websites you visit.  They don't care what video you watch.  This is not a type of first amendment argument.

What they care about is bandwidth/usage.  Right now they are charge variable rates based on speed.  The problem with this is 99% only need the standard package of 50 MiPS or so.  Fiber is nice (I have gig speeds here in Moscow Tower) but it is really not necessary.  Netflix and Porn work just fine at 50 MiPs. 

But in the future when VR/AR, Cloud, 4K video (followed by 6k or 8k) etc come, you will need these faster speeds.  But instead of charging variable rates on speed, why not charge on usage Pay a premium for VR/AR, pay a premium for 4k video.  Don't want to pay the premium?  Then download 720p porn/Netflix.

The worst idea is your suggestion that we have a blanket hike in rates. 

Regarding my references to porn.  Here are the top 12 most trafficked sites in the US over the last 24 hours, as calculated by Similar Web.  So, yes, a lot of this discussion is about porn

1    google.com     Internet and Telecom > Search Engine         
2    facebook.com     Internet and Telecom > Social Network         
3    youtube.com     Arts and Entertainment > TV and Video         
4    amazon.com     Shopping > General Merchandise         
5    yahoo.com     News and Media         
6    pornhub.com     Adult            
7    xvideos.com     Adult         
8    craigslist.org     Shopping > Classifieds            
9    xnxx.com     Adult         
10    ebay.com    Shopping > General Merchandise         
11    netflix.com        Arts and Entertainment > TV and Video      
12    xhamster.com    Adult

[jesmu84]

It's not a mistake. I don't want ISPs to have that control. If they can find a way to pinch pennies, they will. And it won't be limited to the 8k streaming crowd.

[Tugg Speedman]

It's not a mistake. I don't want ISPs to have that control. If they can find a way to pinch pennies, they will. And it won't be limited to the 8k streaming crowd.

Wireless means intense competition.  They will not be able to do what you say.

[jsglow]

See, this is the mistake you and everyone for Net Neutrality here makes.  They are not censoring you.  They don't care what websites you visit.  They don't care what video you watch.  This is not a type of first amendment argument.

What they care about is bandwidth/usage.  Right now they are charge variable rates based on speed.  The problem with this is 99% only need the standard package of 50 MiPS or so.  Fiber is nice (I have gig speeds here in Moscow Tower) but it is really not necessary.  Netflix and Porn work just fine at 50 MiPs. 

But in the future when VR/AR, Cloud, 4K video (followed by 6k or 8k) etc come, you will need these faster speeds.  But instead of charging variable rates on speed, why not charge on usage Pay a premium for VR/AR, pay a premium for 4k video.  Don't want to pay the premium?  Then download 720p porn/Netflix.

The worst idea is your suggestion that we have a blanket hike in rates. 

Regarding my references to porn.  Here are the top 12 most trafficked sites in the US over the last 24 hours, as calculated by Similar Web.  So, yes, a lot of this discussion is about porn

1    google.com     Internet and Telecom > Search Engine         
2    facebook.com     Internet and Telecom > Social Network         
3    youtube.com     Arts and Entertainment > TV and Video         
4    amazon.com     Shopping > General Merchandise         
5    yahoo.com     News and Media         
6    pornhub.com     Adult            
7    xvideos.com     Adult         
8    craigslist.org     Shopping > Classifieds            
9    xnxx.com     Adult         
10    ebay.com    Shopping > General Merchandise         
11    netflix.com        Arts and Entertainment > TV and Video      
12    xhamster.com    Adult

How the h*ll is Scoop not in the top 10?  What's wrong with you people!

[Jay Bee]

9    xnxx.com     Adult         

Had never heard of this site. Thank you for your service!

[#UnleashSean]

I give up on this 1.21 has zero idea what he is talking about. He just said the average household doesn't need 50mb/s. If people like him are in control of this, its over. LOL