Results 101 to 125 of 149
-
11-22-2017, 02:28 PM #101
Yeah, any overtly competitive industry (rideshare, finance / high-freq trading, insurance, blah blah blah) would now introduce another "competitive" mechanism but an underhanded, hidden-from-consumers one that would almost inevitably drive up costs, reduce product quality, and so on.
A proponent of this current nonsense could I guess say, "make this practice illegal," but the retort would just be "keep net neutrality in the first place then."
-
11-22-2017, 02:46 PM #102observing free range rude
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Location
- below the Broads Fork Twins
- Posts
- 5,772
Will TRCO benefit from this nonsense? I figger the respances here might be better.
-
11-22-2017, 03:12 PM #103
We're speaking to two different issues: the possible and the probable. I don't disagree that it's a dangerous negotiation, that's actually what I meant in my first post when I said it's a moment of truth for Google and those who say they want net neutrality. They have the power to enforce it if they band together on the issue, and actions speak louder than words. Heck, they could make it downright difficult for anyone to oppose them by getting some EU legislation that penalizes international companies who don't sign on to a neutrality pledge (which would have teeth under this proposal because non-neutral activities would have to be disclosed). Your prediction that they won't do this is certainly as valid as any other prediction. Just the difference between can't and won't. There's no reason for the industry at large to let it just be Amazon or Google on the other side of the table, they should be united on this. If they do nothing I'm inclined to take that to mean Google is lying when they say they support net neutrality because they can't be too dumb to think of this option.
-
11-22-2017, 03:15 PM #104
I feel like your argument is a bit like saying "if someone cuts off your hand, you get a hook, which you can also use to grab stuff." That is true and I don't disagree, but it's still worse than having a hand even in the best case scenario.
-
11-22-2017, 03:23 PM #105
We do not disagree. But I think you miss my actual point, which is perhaps even more cynical: there are a lot of web companies opposing the change publicly but who might just decide to take advantage of the change if it happens instead of doing something to negate it, which I believe is within their power. What are these companies saying privately? You know, in that room where the bribes get handed over?
If they surprise everyone and do the right thing (the change looks inevitable, but forewarned is forearmed) then I think the analogy of losing a hand would be outlandish hyperbole, but I won't bet on them doing the right thing.
-
11-22-2017, 03:59 PM #106
-
11-22-2017, 04:04 PM #107
the sky is falling !
-chicken little
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HR9vqx9oTQBacon tastes good. Pork chops taste goood.
-
11-22-2017, 04:22 PM #108Funky But Chic
- Join Date
- Sep 2001
- Location
- The Cone of Uncertainty
- Posts
- 49,306
If we're lucky this move will destroy the entire internet and skynet will be averted.
-
11-22-2017, 04:24 PM #109
-
11-22-2017, 04:27 PM #110Funky But Chic
- Join Date
- Sep 2001
- Location
- The Cone of Uncertainty
- Posts
- 49,306
Everyone on tgr would have to be in the same place so we could pass notes around.
-
11-22-2017, 04:40 PM #111
I laughed. Then I realized TGR would be the least of it: what happens to all the Fuckerbergers if that sweet, sweet juice goes missing? TEOTWAWKI
-
11-22-2017, 05:27 PM #112
It just shouldn't happen. Any other argument is stupid. Fucking stupid. You wanna pay cable type shit categories for your internet?
-
11-22-2017, 05:30 PM #113
-
11-22-2017, 11:30 PM #114
-
11-22-2017, 11:48 PM #115
Only if they did it as a negotiation tactic. If it's an industry standard that says "if you want to make money online you have to be neutral or accept throttling/blocking from those who are (otherwise) neutral" then it's just an industry standard. Mix it in with a few others: measures against spam, for example. Happens all the time; see United Laboratories, ISO 9000 etc.
-
11-22-2017, 11:53 PM #116
Interesting points on the inevitable lawsuits.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/22/o...pgtype=articleForum Cross Pollinator, gratuitously strident
-
11-23-2017, 12:21 AM #117
-
11-23-2017, 08:38 AM #118
-
11-23-2017, 09:20 AM #119
I find it interesting that for years everyone has bitched that cable doesn't offer a la carte options, but it is somehow a travesty here.
-
11-23-2017, 09:36 AM #120
What a nutty argument. You don’t really understand how the internet works at all. Comcast doesn’t pay google for the right to “carry google.” Comparisons to cable companies show an incredible misunderstanding of the issue.
Internet access is the sale of bandwidth, not content. Cable companies are fighting to make internet access the same as cable as their existing monopolies crumble under consumer choice.
-
11-23-2017, 02:23 PM #121
-
11-23-2017, 02:35 PM #122
-
11-23-2017, 02:40 PM #123
would you care to explain--because what I could find about ISO 9000 seems to have nothing to do with the issue at hand. In any case, an industry standard--like everybody's VHS tapes being compatible with everyone's VHS players (may the RIP) is one thing. Banding together to enforce a standard that affects how much money other companies can make is about as obvious a case of anti-competitive collusion as you can get. An individual provider can negotiate with an ISP. For example--Google could tell Comcast that if Comcast doesn't provide net neutrality no Google content, including searches, Chrome, Gmail, etc--would run on that ISP. But Google and Amazon and Netflix couldn't get together and make the demand as a group.
-
11-23-2017, 02:53 PM #124Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2015
- Posts
- 5,378
Have you called your representatives today?
https://www.savetheinternet.com/sti-home
https://www.battleforthenet.com/
"Some folks may have the luxury to hold out for “the perfect.” But a lot of Americans are hurting right now and they can’t wait for that." - Hillary Clinton
-
11-23-2017, 02:57 PM #125
Bookmarks