This is an open forum.
1 Like
Exactly. These two issues are completely different things … on different layers… Bottom network level and (content) service level is different. I don’t see anything wrong with someone enforcing their own rules on their own content service. How Facebook’s censorship differs from the censorship our moderator team is doing here on OG? At the end of the day every content provider is responsible for their service and answers authorities. Everyone has different views and different TOS and that is exactly why we need neutrality on the lowest (network) level. So those views can compete.
Aren’t you getting that this is not about FB censorship but about ISP censoring OG and other sites they find inappropriate?
1 Like
Just pointing out that personal anecdotes about an experience with a Canadian ISP operating under Canadian law don’t have anything to do with the United States FCC rules or ISP’s operating in the US under US laws.
3 Likes
yes as in i’m not directly affected by it, but my point is i don’t think anyone will notice a change in their internet usage. i mean, i or you probably never noticed a difference 2 years ago when it became law (other than rising prices.) but i don’t even think internet should be a monthly bill. i’m sure we have the technology and the ability to create a self sufficient system where you pay a one time fee for a receiver and have unlimited unfiltered access. lots of cities offer free wifi.
1 Like
the issue is a court ruling from 1946 setting a precedent
“In a 5-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled in Marsh’s favor. Justice Hugo Black decreed that private entities do not have the right to ban speech on their property if they happen to own a monopoly on the means by which speech can take place. Black also argued that the more that private entities open their property up to public use, the fewer rights they have to control or ban what people do on that property.”
since youtube and facebook own the monopolies for those venues of free speech, it is an infringement of the constitutional right to free speech
Aren’t you getting that this is not about FB censorship but about ISP censoring OG and other sites they find inappropriate?
there is nothing stopping them from doing that already. it already happens all the time. my point is this will have little if any impact on mine or your use of the internet. it is corporate warfare. it’s like pepsi vs coke. why would i care.
1 Like
That would be nice, but until that day we are at the mercy of the ISP’s. To whom the repeal of the regulations can only be seen as a benefit.
The ISP’s are already so large that they are practically impossible to compete with so deregulation has little chance of spurring innovation or benefiting the public.
Another thing that the FCC has done with their repeal is make it illegal for the states to create or enforce their own regulations.
Here’s something I found surprising; Most states have laws prohibiting public utilities from creating broadband infrastructure or providing internet services. How could this possibly benefit the public in any way?
yes i admit i am very uneducated about the whole workings of the systems and all my information has come from reading 2 or 3 opposing articles lol these are great points! i thought Minneapolis was one of the places with city wide free wifi though
edit: not free. 6mb/s for $20 a month being the lowest bracket and contracted a private company to build the network
I’m not sure about Minneapolis. Colorado was just trying to change their laws to allow public utilities to expand into broadband. I think they were successful.
I try to ask myself “Who is going to benefit from this?” whenever I read news articles.
If it isn’t such a big deal one way or the other, why did this shill of human make it such a priority?
1 Like
lol i found that pretty funny, and didn’t you hear, you can still do everything else you did on the internet… everything!!
its just when i’m reading everyones talking points for why it’s a bad thing to repeal they all ring hollow with me, as in my experience all the protections they are complaining about losing never existed. i’ve been having to use offshore VPS and proxies for certain activities for years. it seems misleading to me, and i wonder, why am i being misled?
this is an interesting article from the day FCC voted to institute net neutrality
1 Like
This is a classic watch, wait and learn situation. My hope is that in 2018, when the Congress swings back toward sanity, all of the damage currently being doled out by our shitbird leaders will be rapidly undone again.
i think giving government complete control of regulating things never works out in the public interest. it “diminishes the market power of customers” and usually ends up favoring whoever can afford the most lobbying and political pressure. there is no such thing as ‘neutral’ and i think the whole net neutrality thing was a solution to a made up problem to begin with. no one was worrying about unfair ISP practices 2 years ago, before the obama administration told everyone they should be. was just a means for the government to take more control of the publics life imo. but i could very likely be wrong, i often am 
i hope i don’t offend anyone or come as too argumentative, i often get tunnel vision on certain things i am not well informed about and welcome all opposing views and corrections to my logic!! thanks for bringing a different perspective guys
Not me anyway. It matters that people learn about this. I suspect it isn’t “nothing”, and I would be happy to learn it isn’t. But everything Trump has touched so far has died.
Pretty sure an ISP deciding which sites I can visit, or how much bandwidth they deserve would have been the opposite of “internet neutrality”.
2 Likes
yes and i should reiterate too i don’t think it’s a good thing, regulation is definitely necessary in some industries. i guess i’m just apathetic which is a bad way to be. it would be fun to get involved with local government.
ISPs already block access to certain websites (piracy CP etc) and throttle certain types of traffic so that’s where my problem with understanding what net neutrality was even accomplishing comes from. i guess i’m in canada so maybe they don’t do that in the states. but then i read on cbc or whatever canada ‘still has strong net neutrality rules’
Fuck the people who want’t to give fear to the people.
Grow some herbs and spread your ideas.
Be well.
1 Like
@legalcanada what you are describing used to be illegal here in the US. Until yesterday.
What the repeal amounts to here is a financial handout for ISP’s. Just like what you were describing, special interests lobbying to get what they want at the expense of the public.
Personally I don’t think that because things are already bad we should actively try to make them worse.
1 Like
How much better the world would be if this were the prevailing thinking!
50 Likes Brother Rick
2 Likes
then yes i’m confusing my experience with canadian ISPs and assuming they operate the same way in USA.
they’ve been throttling torrent/p2p traffic here for a long time, and upload speeds for other things as well. i had to pay for offshore seedboxes to maintain good standing with private trackers.
sorry i think i was wrong in a few assumptions fundamental to my position, thanks for educating the ignorant!