Net Neutrality
0
Takerial
Lovable Teddy Bear
Tegumi wrote...
Kalistean wrote...
The FCC sold out? Since when? http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703581204576033513990668654.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStoriesYour article says that the bill the OP's article was passed. So yes, they sold out.
My article says they passed a bill guaranteeing net neutrality.
The Federal Communications Commission on Tuesday voted 3-2 to back Chairman Julius Genachowski's plan for what is commonly known as "net neutrality," or rules prohibiting Internet providers from interfering with legal web traffic. President Barack Obama said the FCC's action will "help preserve the free and open nature of the Internet."
Good job reading.
0
Tegumi
"im always cute"
Yes, we considered the bill that was originally under debate (OP's article) to be "selling out". The fact that it passed (your article) means that, from our perspective, they "sold out".
0
ISP 1: "We're charging you to visit extremely popular site X"
ISP 2: "We're not."
Everyone switches to ISP 2.
And this is exactly why the bill was/is complete balls and is never going to mean a damn thing. Moreover ISPs in Britain are actually lividly pissed about crunching down on the availability of pornography, whether or not it reduces the chances of children coming across it. They really don't care, all they want are customers, all they want is money, so what makes you guys think they would actually charge people to visit a porn site when their competition could just as easily not charge people to visit the exact same site?
ISP 2: "We're not."
Everyone switches to ISP 2.
And this is exactly why the bill was/is complete balls and is never going to mean a damn thing. Moreover ISPs in Britain are actually lividly pissed about crunching down on the availability of pornography, whether or not it reduces the chances of children coming across it. They really don't care, all they want are customers, all they want is money, so what makes you guys think they would actually charge people to visit a porn site when their competition could just as easily not charge people to visit the exact same site?
0
Navikt wrote...
ISP 1: "We're charging you to visit extremely popular site X"ISP 2: "We're not."
Everyone switches to ISP 2.
And this is exactly why the bill was/is complete balls and is never going to mean a damn thing. Moreover ISPs in Britain are actually lividly pissed about crunching down on the availability of pornography, what makes you guys think they would actually charge people to visit a porn site when their competition could just as easily not charge people to visit the exact same site?
The opportunity to make more money for zero extra service given, that's what. Also, it's not porn that this will immediately be effected by. It's youtube, netflix, online gaming, and other high-bandwidth activites.
No ISP is just gonna decide to not charge people extra for this. ISP 1 might charge an extra $50 a month, while ISP2 charges an extra $48. Both are still making a ton more money, and that's money out of the consumer's pocket for no extra service given.