Windows 10: When FCC Kills Net Neutrality, Here's What Internet Could Look Like

I think I better leave too before I post my political displeasures with Mr. fake and his direction he wants to take our country in. I'll simply say each day the nightmare gets worse.

Out.

 

that's why net neutrality was started, there were those who knew what could happen if companies could charge for different access speed to certain things....it was to set up a even playing field.

 

So there was no problem in existence for it to correct? It was set up to prevent a problem that "could" occur. And that is the exact basis for my comment earlier, "I just don't remember things being all that bad on June 11, 2015... " There was no problem that the government had to correct.

But, I suppose the title of this this thread is Here's What Internet Could Look Like....

Or it could also be if Grandma wants to use less than 1 GB per month to check her email at 50MB/S speed, she would be able to purchase an internet plan to do that for $15/month instead of having to pay $30+/month in order to subsidize those who don't want to pay extra for their huge bandwidth requirements.

 

Hi,
Indeed I never saw a issue either before all this started
My internet bill was low
Now it's high and most are saying it could get worse *Smile
I tried Amazon prime it's full of old crappy movies.
Netfix is the same
The decent movies I have dvd's for *Biggrin

All I know now is I have 1tb of data I barely use and guess what it is a basic contract at a not so basic rate :/
My cell phone isn't much different way too much data that I don't need or want
I'd happily take lower data/ minutes packages if it will save me money dang that sounded like a gallery furniture commercial lol *Roflmao2

 

The reason for the news thread is to learn and stay current on tech and/or tech companies as much as possible. Looks to me that some either didn't do some research or relying on their own opinion. This is really all about our modern communications, not just surfing the Net. The Net is probably our last communications frontier.

Although I haven't had one for ten years, I used and paid for a landline telephone extensively since I was a teener like I'm sure most of you have. With a long career in construction I've been buying cell service since bag phones in the 90’s. My first ISP was AOHell where basically they kept customers in their walled playpen. I have a brother that started out with landline Ma Bell back in the 60's, worked his way up to management, then went with AT&Bleed data his last 20 years when they broke Bell up. He retired 10 years ago with much AT&Bleed stock that he watches like a hawk. I have a nephew that works for AT&Bleed cellular out of Twin Cities. A good friend that retired from managing all the Veri-con garages on the East Coast. Another good friend that manages the site/portal for a very large medical lab certification company who has a very large ISP contract. I converse with all them regularly.

From just this Wikipedia article, which pretty much sums up with just a few things that went on through the years and what they tried/want to get away with: Net neutrality - Wikipedia

In referring to the bold type in my article quote; There's a swamp in Washington and I smell a swamp rat. Ajit V. Pai is a lawyer that used to hold a position with Veri-con and now FCC chief. Why would the FCC let Veri-con get away with that stunt? Let's put 2 and 2 together. *Think

Personally, I'm all for net neutrality with no throttling and watching ISPs as it is now. I'm not for bundling of cable TV stations, ISP/Cell/TV, cell phones per account, or any combination imaginable thereof. I'm for pay what you use at the speed/cell/landline minutes one uses on any device, although I doubt it’ll go to that extent.

Think of all the data, cell minutes, TV stations not watched, or even landline minutes not used in just the US alone. You think one group is subsidizing another group? I suggest you think again. Then think of all the profit they make with the ads they shove in our faces while paying for their services. Do you think they’re hurting?

As you may tell, I'm no respecter of data companies. Enough. Talk is cheap. I did my part and took the action to comment about net neutrality on the FCC site. I advise all to do likewise whichever way you think it should go.

 

I think the internet (in the US) will have to implode under the greed of the telecoms before it gets better.

We’re going to have to sit back and watch it burn until people get mad, raise enough stink for the government to step in and put a stop to it.

When it finally happens, I hope it begins with the breakup of ATT, Comcast, Charter and Verizon. After that, bar any ISP from also owning a media company. It’s a conflict of interest. You’re a dumb pipe, nothing more. Finally classify ISPs as a utility like the power company. The internet is no longer a luxury service and it’s time to start treating it as such.

 

I actually get more than my "up-to" speed.

 

You may be right about the implosion, but hopefully it won't have to get to that point. Don't want to see people out of work due to ISPs' greed. There should be a citizens' watch group along with the government that oversees this just as with utility companies. And I feel you're also correct that it should be classified a utility. Although I'm in a certain utility's area I get to choose who I buy my gas, electricity, and water from. This creates competition, which keeps greed down and prices low.

I also agree that that it is indeed a conflict of interest. They shouldn't own any media company. Helps to eliminate propaganda.

 

That's one good thing I can say about my ISP. They do provision a little more than what I contract for. However this may be situational. I don't live in a heavily populated area and most of my neighbors have a different ISP, so I don't see any traffic bog down at peak times.

 

Judge Green Broke up AT&T back in the early 1980's and it is now more of a monopoly that it was then. Now this is my final post on this topic as with the reference to Mr Fake--Politics has already begun in this thread,/

 

Net Neutrality isn't about ones upload/download speeds. It the speed that content providers have access to. If providers such as Netflix have to pay more to provide us content then the increase is going to be passed on to the customers. Companies such as Comcast provide their own content and want there content to be our first choice. This is a example of greed at it's best.

 

Hi,
Funny I was under the impression it was all about data usage and inadequate data plans for that usage *Smile

 

Isn't it wonderful...

Money can buy anything these days, even a country like the US of A

 

That is correct and if A Gamer thinks he will be able to use Steam for free, guess again. This is absolutely not good for the consumer at all end of story./

 

Just how many absolutely last posts are v you going to make on this subject? I believe this is you third so far.