What is the benefit/consequence of Net Neutrality? Should it have been repealed? What impact will this have?

Capt Sabrena Goldman — Thu, 14 Dec 2017 16:06:16 -0500

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2017 4:11 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Dec 2017 16:11:29 -0500

Still trying to find the source to determine the impact. Certainly doesn't sound good.

Response by SPC David Willis made Dec 14 at 2017 4:17 PM

SPC David Willis — Thu, 14 Dec 2017 16:17:03 -0500

Opens a lot of doors for a lot of possibilities, but form pure enactment it doesn't do anything other than make possibilities possible. It does stop it from being taxed I believe, although it'll be a cold day in hell when my internet lowers my bill because of it.

Response by LT Brad McInnis made Dec 14 at 2017 10:16 PM

LT Brad McInnis — Thu, 14 Dec 2017 22:16:55 -0500

Did I have problems before the enactment of the regulation? Nope. Is the outcry from the people opposed to the repeal outsized? Yep (they called in a bomb threat to try and stop it). So, to me that means to me that this is no big deal. What I will say about the only non-partisan information that I could find deals with how this was put under Title II because the Obama administration couldn't get it done any other way. Title II is an outdated reg that covers old phone lines. If things need regulation, do it in the light of day, don't try to shoehorn it into an arcane area so you can get it done... My 2 cents.

Response by Capt Sabrena Goldman made Dec 14 at 2017 10:39 PM

Capt Sabrena Goldman — Thu, 14 Dec 2017 22:39:48 -0500

Coverup real intentions!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 15 at 2017 1:43 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Dec 2017 01:43:31 -0500

A consequence would be an ISP throttling the speed of your net. Like that high speed internet you got right now? Six months from now you could be paying double for that same speed. Or you could be paying the same amount you currently pay for a quarter of the speed.
Like watching Hulu/Netflicks/Youtube Red? Guess what? You're current internet subscription no longer supports them. You now have to upgrade your internet package.
It is possible the consumers could benefit from an increase in ISP competition, but when you have ISPs like Comcast who regularly attempt to rip people off it does make things look rather pessimistic.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 15 at 2017 10:11 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Dec 2017 10:11:01 -0500

huge impact, as I stated in a different conversation , our internet is already sloe as s**t comparing to European internet but now they gonna slow/limit us even more ????

Response by CSM Richard StCyr made Dec 15 at 2017 10:13 AM

CSM Richard StCyr — Fri, 15 Dec 2017 10:13:42 -0500

I find it odd that before net neutrality we had the internet and it worked pretty good, this morning when I turned on the computer and checked the news and now rally point I was shocked to discover that again without net neutrality the internet was still running and working pretty well.
Sort of like the Mayan calendar and Y2K we hit 2000 and everything still ran and passed 2012 and the earth still turned.

Response by SGT Tony Clifford made Dec 15 at 2017 12:34 PM

SGT Tony Clifford — Fri, 15 Dec 2017 12:34:40 -0500

This is the funny thing. They aren't repealing all regulations on ISPs. They are simply going from title II regulation which is very heavy regulation from the FCC back down to title I which was a more reactive regulation done by both the FCC and FTC. From 1994-2015 this was the regulatory approach the government used. ISPs weren't allowed to throttle internet back then. There were a couple of incidents back then of ISPs attempting that, but the FTC resolved those problems. For all the hoopla about net neutrality all title II did was mandate that all data packets be treated the same regardless of bandwidth consumption.

Of course Google (owner of YouTube) and Netflix are against the undoing of this. Their platforms consume a disproportionate amount of bandwidth compared to other sites. They would much rather not have to shoulder some of the costs of providing their services. The craziest part of the debate is Google is controlling the information on the subject even though they're one of the biggest benefactors of net neutrality. Think of it like this. If you're big into online gaming and your ISP wanted to offer a service that would be geared to giving online gaming services a fast lane in one package, why is that wrong? So long as they have services for people who want standard services they enjoy now, but provide options at a different price point for consumers who have differing wants from their internet consumption, they aren't doing anything wrong.