2aHawaii
General Topics => Legal and Activism => Topic started by: hvybarrels on December 14, 2017, 05:25:24 PM
-
How many mass shootings on the mainland do you think it will take until Spectrum starts throttling back 2aHawaii.com and hawaiirifleassociation.org?
(or demands extra money?)
-
How many mass shootings on the mainland do you think it will take until Spectrum starts throttling back 2aHawaii.com and hawaiirifleassociation.org?
(or demands extra money?)
As opposed to the gov't hitting the "censor" switch when a Democrat get's caught with his pants down 1 month before an election?
-
As opposed to the gov't hitting the "censor" switch when a Democrat get's caught with his pants down 1 month before an election?
Um, maybe? Not sure what you are talking about. Most of the giant media companies and telecoms are left-leaning and not afraid to swing their silicon sausage when it comes to shoving views down everyone's throat. Hillary would have never gotten as far as she did without them.
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/10/fired-google-employee-lack-of-ideological-diversity-has-hurt-our-products.html
-
Um, maybe? Not sure what you are talking about. Most of the giant media companies and telecoms are left-leaning and not afraid to swing their silicon sausage when it comes to shoving views down everyone's throat. Hillary would have never gotten as far as she did without them.
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/10/fired-google-employee-lack-of-ideological-diversity-has-hurt-our-products.html
The nice thing about capitalism is where there's demand, there's someone willing to cater to it. In case you missed it, conservatism isn't dead, nor are conservatives broke. If we need another player in the market to balance the Liberals, we'll get it. If the gov't is running things? Remember the IRS targeting Tea Party nonprofits?
-
https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2017/12/14/sad-j-r-salzman-survives-iraq-war-is-killed-by-netneutrality-repeal/
(https://i.imgur.com/EtR9wSD.png?1)
-
“It is time for the Internet, once again, to be driven by engineers and entrepreneurs and
consumers rather than lawyers, accountants and bureaucrats.”
Makes sense to me. Abuse of any regulations when it comes to mass communication is a perpetual concern.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/14/net-neutrality-vote-fcc-hearing-room-briefly-cleared-after-security-threat.html
-
Um, maybe? Not sure what you are talking about. Most of the giant media companies and telecoms are left-leaning and not afraid to swing their silicon sausage when it comes to shoving views down everyone's throat. Hillary would have never gotten as far as she did without them.
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/10/fired-google-employee-lack-of-ideological-diversity-has-hurt-our-products.html
And since most or all of the giant media companies are supporting Net Neutrality, then you also support the giant media companies?
Most or all of the giant media companies are supporting Net Neutrality so they can squash their competition and run out the little guys. We all know what happens when competition is eliminated...
https://www.dailywire.com/news/18613/7-reasons-net-neutrality-idiotic-aaron-bandler
The Internet was alive and well and mostly free of most the things you think will happen without Net Neutrality in place. Because I am ignorant of these things, maybe you can provide me with examples of all the things that you say are going to occur without Net Neutrality that happened in the previous 20 years when there was no Net neutrality? I would think that if all the bad things you say are going to happen would have already been happening before Net Neutrality was in place.
-
I would reply but I’m having trouble downloading your message.
-
I can see how the "War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery." arguments have their appeal especially when opposing something means *gasp* sharing an opinion with someone that has ideological differences when it comes to other issues.
My first post lays out the concerns very clearly.
Spectrum can now throttle 2a and HRA (or most likely demand more money ala Facebook adverts) and there's nothing anyone can do about it. Even if HawaiianTel decides to pass on the extra revenue stream that still means the majority of our audience is going to have a diminished experience. Either this site will have to start charging users or move operations to one of the big net company platforms that have no problem squashing opinions that they don't agree with. If you like 1A there's always direct mail flyers and actual meet-ups I suppose.
Marx was right about one thing. Unregulated Capitalism becomes a parasite that inevitably kills the host.
-
I can see how the "War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery." arguments have their appeal especially when opposing something means *gasp* sharing an opinion with someone that has ideological differences when it comes to other issues.
My first post lays out the concerns very clearly.
Spectrum can now throttle 2a and HRA (or most likely demand more money ala Facebook adverts) and there's nothing anyone can do about it. Even if HawaiianTel decides to pass on the extra revenue stream that still means the majority of our audience is going to have a diminished experience. Either this site will have to start charging users or move operations to one of the big net company platforms that have no problem squashing opinions that they don't agree with. If you like 1A there's always direct mail flyers and actual meet-ups I suppose.
Marx was right about one thing. Unregulated Capitalism becomes a parasite that inevitably kills the host.
Not true, they can not throttle anyone, what they can do is offer a faster option for traffic tho.
For example if you pay for a 10Mb connection, all traffic will come to you at 10MB. But say they want to offer you the option to pay for netflix to be at faster rate of 15MB for an ectra $5 a month they can.
-
Or another way to look at it is this, it’s like a toll road .
Drive at 60MPH on the regular freeway or pay $10 a month and drive on the express freeway at $70 but that freeway only goes to one destination unlike the regular freeway which goes everywhere
-
Not true, they can not throttle anyone, what they can do is offer a faster option for traffic tho.
For example if you pay for a 10Mb connection, all traffic will come to you at 10MB. But say they want to offer you the option to pay for netflix to be at faster rate of 15MB for an ectra $5 a month they can.
Source on "not being able to throttle anyone?"
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
-
And we all love toll roads...
-
And we all love toll roads...
You do if you built the road and are charging the toll!
-
Source on "not being able to throttle anyone?"
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
They can throttle bandwidth speeds IF the contract the customer agreed to says they can. This is one of those issues that providers already are abandoning to draw new customers in since the infrastructure can support higher network saturation.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/OxfZMSD.jpg)
-
They can throttle bandwidth speeds IF the contract the customer agreed to says they can. This is one of those issues that providers already are abandoning to draw new customers in since the infrastructure can support higher network saturation.
Have you seen all the "unlimited" plans by the wireless carriers? It's the same way, you have a grandfathered plan you're Ok but eventually they'll get the majority of people to change contracts that allow throttling, cap video resolution, music quality, etc.
Your home Internet will be the same way, you'll have to pay more if you want what you have now.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
-
I already have the highest bandwith for Spectrum and still lag when playing call of duty. Can I get my money back?
-
I already have the highest bandwith for Spectrum and still lag when playing call of duty. Can I get my money back?
no
-
Have you seen all the "unlimited" plans by the wireless carriers? It's the same way, you have a grandfathered plan you're Ok but eventually they'll get the majority of people to change contracts that allow throttling, cap video resolution, music quality, etc.
Your home Internet will be the same way, you'll have to pay more if you want what you have now.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
I already pay for the 300Mbps plan -- the fastest residential plan available in my area.
Hurt me, hurt me! :geekdanc:
-
I already have the highest bandwith for Spectrum and still lag when playing call of duty. Can I get my money back?
Lag has nothing to do with badwith and everything to do with ping, bad pings are caused by distance.
-
Have you seen all the "unlimited" plans by the wireless carriers? It's the same way, you have a grandfathered plan you're Ok but eventually they'll get the majority of people to change contracts that allow throttling, cap video resolution, music quality, etc.
Your home Internet will be the same way, you'll have to pay more if you want what you have now.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
They can still do that even with net neutrality.
-
I already have the highest bandwith for Spectrum and still lag when playing call of duty. Can I get my money back?
If you run the online SpeedTest from Ookla, you'll see several things. You'll see the latency (how long it takes a network packet to travel between points), the average bandwidth speed measured in MegaBits Per Second for both upload and download directions, and the minimum & maximum speeds for upload/download speeds.
When it comes to gaming, the disparity between upload and download speeds is what's most important. Cable modems use Coaxial Cable to deliver the TV/Internet signal. There's a solid wire and a bunch of shielding. Being able to generate duplex (simultaneous 2-way) communications to the modem over a single conductor was a feat in itself. Then with new compression algorithms and hardware, they've greatly exceeded the 10Mbps theoretical speed of what was "thin net" bandwidth speeds.
For the longest time, the download speeds were ever-increasing, but the upload speed was constrained at 10Mbps. Not too long ago, the upload speed doubled to 20Mbps. Depending on the service provider and the modem you use, compression can get up to 1GB download speeds, but here on Oahu, 300Mbps is Spectrum's max. Those download speeds are possible because of compression and decompression of the data as it's transmitted from the local RoadRunner routers to the home.
Speeds are limited to the fastest link in a path to/from the client/server. So, if you're connecting to a server in New York, and the path to Hawaii is being routed through a slower than 300Mbps segment, you won't be able to get full speed between that server and your PC. Tests to the local RoadRunner router will show 300Mbps+, but that's just the closest segment to your home. You can select test servers on Ookla in the area you are seeing sluggishness from to see whether the problem is the server or the wide area network.
There are other factors affecting speed. One is the pattern of Internet use of your neighbors. Bandwidth is redirected on routers as demand increases and decreases. If demand of your neighborhood increases suddenly at 6PM, you will see sluggish response times until (if) the routers compensate for the load.
Back to gaming. When you shoot a player, there is a 2-part packet exchange: you send a kill packet, and he receives that kill packet. If your download speeds are way faster than your upload speeds, as is the case with all cable modems, you'll be DOWNLOADING his kill packets long before he ever receives your uploaded kill packets. The solution for a laggy connection is a balanced connection. Many gamers like DSL better and pay for the extra speeds to be balanced, making the game fairer. Some players who like to win at all cost will use an unbalanced line so they have faster uploads than downloads, basically the reverse of a cable connection, slowing down the virtual bullets for incoming attacks and speeding up outgoing.
Bottom line: cable internet is "laggy" for gamers at all speed levels. I've seen many gamers create "Cable Modem Only" rooms to make the game fair. Otherwise a DSL player just wipes the floor with everyone else.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/ewCaqnZ.jpg?1)
-
Google is a huge proponent of Net Neutrality. Rumor is they wrote the regulation. However, Google is not effected at all by the Net Neutrailty regulations. So they can still do what they want and to whom they want. It gives them all leeway they want to stifle competitors. Here is a great article explaining how Net Neutrality government regulation really effects the Internet:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/24004/everything-you-need-know-about-why-net-neutrality-harry-khachatrian
The talking points for Net Neutrality are aimed at scaring the unknowing and those who don't understand how the Internet is truly implemented. Net Neutrality has nothing to do with Neutrality at all. It is a way for Google and other large Internet companies to have a huge advantage over their smaller competition. Which is why neutrality is a lie of the left and proponents of this government regulation.
The facts are this, in the approximate 20 years of Internet prior to 2015 when this government regulation was implemented by the Marxist Obama, not one company or website was throttled by any ISP due solely to competitive reasons. Not one company that has the ability to throttle any website they feel like has ever done it. And they certainly don't give a flying crap about a small peanuts site such as this site. Nor do they care about small peanuts like the end users. Net Neutrality is designed to give Google a huge advantage over their competitors and all of us should be more worried about lack of competition than the lies of the left. JMHO
-
Not much is going to change with net neutrality gone. We've been doing fine prior to it. Blood is not going to run through the streets and the earth will not implode.
Trump is fulfilling his pledge to cut regulations and exceeding expectations. This is one of them.
(https://static.politico.com/dims4/default/13dded8/2147483647/resize/1160x%3E/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2F6b%2F61%2Fd11aab6f4defa6e235ea72301f1b%2F171214-donald-trump-ap-1160.jpg)
-
If you run the online SpeedTest from Ookla, you'll see several things. You'll see the latency (how long it takes a network packet to travel between points), the average bandwidth speed measured in MegaBits Per Second for both upload and download directions, and the minimum & maximum speeds for upload/download speeds.
When it comes to gaming, the disparity between upload and download speeds is what's most important. Cable modems use Coaxial Cable to deliver the TV/Internet signal. There's a solid wire and a bunch of shielding. Being able to generate duplex (simultaneous 2-way) communications to the modem over a single conductor was a feat in itself. Then with new compression algorithms and hardware, they've greatly exceeded the 10Mbps theoretical speed of what was "thin net" bandwidth speeds.
For the longest time, the download speeds were ever-increasing, but the upload speed was constrained at 10Mbps. Not too long ago, the upload speed doubled to 20Mbps. Depending on the service provider and the modem you use, compression can get up to 1GB download speeds, but here on Oahu, 300Mbps is Spectrum's max. Those download speeds are possible because of compression and decompression of the data as it's transmitted from the local RoadRunner routers to the home.
Speeds are limited to the fastest link in a path to/from the client/server. So, if you're connecting to a server in New York, and the path to Hawaii is being routed through a slower than 300Mbps segment, you won't be able to get full speed between that server and your PC. Tests to the local RoadRunner router will show 300Mbps+, but that's just the closest segment to your home. You can select test servers on Ookla in the area you are seeing sluggishness from to see whether the problem is the server or the wide area network.
There are other factors affecting speed. One is the pattern of Internet use of your neighbors. Bandwidth is redirected on routers as demand increases and decreases. If demand of your neighborhood increases suddenly at 6PM, you will see sluggish response times until (if) the routers compensate for the load.
Back to gaming. When you shoot a player, there is a 2-part packet exchange: you send a kill packet, and he receives that kill packet. If your download speeds are way faster than your upload speeds, as is the case with all cable modems, you'll be DOWNLOADING his kill packets long before he ever receives your uploaded kill packets. The solution for a laggy connection is a balanced connection. Many gamers like DSL better and pay for the extra speeds to be balanced, making the game fairer. Some players who like to win at all cost will use an unbalanced line so they have faster uploads than downloads, basically the reverse of a cable connection, slowing down the virtual bullets for incoming attacks and speeding up outgoing.
Bottom line: cable internet is "laggy" for gamers at all speed levels. I've seen many gamers create "Cable Modem Only" rooms to make the game fair. Otherwise a DSL player just wipes the floor with everyone else.
Flapp, this is a pretty good explanation of how the system here works. You put a lot of time into this.
What I can suggest if you have the funds is to get business class Internet which usually has a balanced upload/download connection. Or at the very least, it has a much higher upload speed than your standard Internet connection. While I don't know the specifics of Spectrum's business class connection I am sure it will help with the latency and upload speeds that sometimes plagues gamers. I know when I was running my own server at home I had to pay for business class in order to provide good download speeds to my customers.
BTW, when I ran my own server at home it was attacked mercilessly by hackers. They actually took up a lot of my bandwidth at times running their password brute force attacks and other things.
-
Flapp, this is a pretty good explanation of how the system here works. You put a lot of time into this.
What I can suggest if you have the funds is to get business class Internet which usually has a balanced upload/download connection. Or at the very least, it has a much higher upload speed than your standard Internet connection. While I don't know the specifics of Spectrum's business class connection I am sure it will help with the latency and upload speeds that sometimes plagues gamers. I know when I was running my own server at home I had to pay for business class in order to provide good download speeds to my customers.
BTW, when I ran my own server at home it was attacked mercilessly by hackers. They actually took up a lot of my bandwidth at times running their password brute force attacks and other things.
Yeah, for my servers running Linux, I set up scripts to run nightly that "scraped" IP addresses from my security logs, identified which ones were not US-based, and added them to the "block list" for my firewall. The vast majority of foreign IPs where Chinese, followed by German, French and Russian. Lots also came through African countries like Nigeria.
-
Sometimes when the internet seems slow, I try the speedtest and get the standard 330mbps to Honolulu. I then try a mainland server and get about half, probably because some asshole shark is chewing on the cable lines. Right now, I'm getting 100mbps but I blame my neighbors for watching too much porn at home. I hated my mom's DSL (too slow and laggy) since that's all she could get and never tried it at home myself.
Since WW2, Presidents have always gone back and forth with regulation/deregulation. Obama regulates the banking industry, Reagan deregulates the airline industry, etc. The only discrepancy I can think of is when Nixon signed the OSHA and EPA bills. The GOP is all about cutting taxes and deregulation. The Dems are all about discretionary spending and regulations. It's the balance in the Force. (Yes, going to see it tonight.) Eventually the Dems will get into power and enact new regulations, and then the GOP again, and then the Dems, etc. Thanks to our (failing?) government system, I'm not too worried.
The internet looks at censorship as a roadblock and tries to get around it. Chairman Pai says that net deregulation will lead to innovation, I suppose like a new Apple or Microsoft. That's highly unlikely since it's all been done before. What's more likely is that someone will innovate a new internet like the darkweb but less seedy and disgusting (unless you're an Alabama politician). This will bankrupt the current internet giants, their corporate stocks will crash, and the world will be a better place.
If you want to know what the future innovations will be, take a look at all of the mundane time sucks that occur in our lives. In the past, washing dishes taking too long... dishwashers. Too long to cook dinner... microwaves. Newspapers and magazines too cumbersome... fake news. The biggest time suck I can see today is the daily commute to work. In 20 years, the new internet and driverless cars will eliminate most of this. Someday, our robot overlords will lead us to a brighter tomorrow and no one will notice or care.
-
If you want to know what the future innovations will be, take a look at all of the mundane time sucks that occur in our lives. In the past, washing dishes taking too long... dishwashers. Too long to cook dinner... microwaves. Newspapers and magazines too cumbersome... fake news. The biggest time suck I can see today is the daily commute to work. In 20 years, the new internet and driverless cars will eliminate most of this. Someday, our robot overlords will lead us to a brighter tomorrow and no one will notice or care.
That's how progress is supposed to work, but if you take a closer look it's not working at all. Half the country is below the poverty line and dishwasher sales (along with other consumerfabulous wonders) are collecting dust on the shelves. Our economy is in the toilet, but people who aren't out on the street yet can pretend everything's okay thanks to deficit spending, overpriced healthcare, and all sorts of financial shenanigans/speculative bubbles.
The reason people haven't risen up to take back runaway government is because radio and television are owned by five huge corporations and most of what gets broadcast are self-serving lies. Back in their day radio and TV were celebrated as wonder technologies that would restore democracy, but the same thing that happened to them is what's happening to the internet now. Hijacked by corporate interests.
Now they have us right where they want us, fighting each other in some b.s. culture war so we can't see that Google's tepid stance against neutrality was just for show so that they didn't instantly loose market share for supporting such an unpopular policy. This policy is a big win for them. They can afford to take over as much bandwidth as they need to control information and crush competition. It will be like radio and tv now. Crappy programming and lame advertisements, except those who can still afford it at that point will be much more likely to get their identity stolen if they use it for anything serious like banking.
And as far as building a new internet that will compete? Good luck with finding someone to foot the bill for all the cables, power, and server space. There are easier ways to get money from people without being so industrious, like bribing regulators and setting up new monopolies.
-
That's the point of innovation and net deregulation. This allows someone to think of something new that bypasses the existing infrastructure. Look at Bitcoin. Someone figured out how to bypass the banking infrastructure and government oversight. How much is it up to these days? Sure it's a bubble that's about to pop but it is a wonder.
-
Or another way to look at it is this, it’s like a toll road .
Drive at 60MPH on the regular freeway or pay $10 a month and drive on the express freeway at $70 but that freeway only goes to one destination unlike the regular freeway which goes everywhere
Not the best comparison. Under net neutrality, an internet provider could always charge the end user more for more speed. The issue with net neutrality is that content providers can now be limited, charged extra, and essentially killed.
Additionally with a freeway that has an express road you can always take street roads. With the internet, many if not most, areas have no other internet options. It severely limits the ability of consumers from affecting internet providers and it also severely limits the capability of other companies to compete. This is why electricity and water companies are regulated as utilities.
What happens if an internet provider decides to charge more for data from republican content providers?
-
Google very strongly supports Net Neutrality:
https://www.google.com/takeaction/
They have from the very beginning and are still staunch proponents for this government regulation.
Based on information from their own website it appears they will not have to abide by the Net Neutrality regulation because of how they connect to the Internet.
https://peering.google.com/#/infrastructure
So why would Google support a regulation that adversely effects their competition but not them? Only one logical conclusion is to squash their competition.
-
So why would Google support a regulation that adversely effects their competition but not them? Only one logical conclusion is to squash their competition.
For the same reason people who pay no income tax are for higher taxes & against tax cuts. :geekdanc:
-
Not the best comparison. Under net neutrality, an internet provider could always charge the end user more for more speed. The issue with net neutrality is that content providers can now be limited, charged extra, and essentially killed.
Additionally with a freeway that has an express road you can always take street roads. With the internet, many if not most, areas have no other internet options. It severely limits the ability of consumers from affecting internet providers and it also severely limits the capability of other companies to compete. This is why electricity and water companies are regulated as utilities.
What happens if an internet provider decides to charge more for data from republican content providers?
no.
Your implication is that they can slow down traffic and that's not true, you pay for XXX speed and that's what you get. If you want certain aspects/websites to go faster then you pay more.
Your either falling for left wing properganda or trolling,
-
no.
Your implication is that they can slow down traffic and that's not true, you pay for XXX speed and that's what you get. If you want certain aspects/websites to go faster then you pay more.
Your either falling for left wing properganda or trolling,
Please feed your quails and not the troll. I enjoyed your farm thread.
-
Just heard reports of Hawaii legislators working on legislation to ensure net neutrality for Hawaii. I recall Kaniala Ing’s name. I’d like to see how they are going to work that out.
-
no.
Your implication is that they can slow down traffic and that's not true, you pay for XXX speed and that's what you get. If you want certain aspects/websites to go faster then you pay more.
Your either falling for left wing properganda or trolling,
Neither. Again, I am not talking about the end user, I am talking about a content provider, a website. You paying more to get good speed is irrelevant if what you want is blocked or specifically slowed by an internet provider.
It seems you don't fully understand the history of this issue. Here is one of the actual specific issues that really brought this to light. Comcast, an internet provider, is also part owner of Hulu which is a direct competitor with Netflix. Comcast could then slow down the signal from Netflix instead prioritizing videos from Hulu. So use a little imagination and see how an internet provider could "slow" access to things they don't like. What if they "slowed" access pro second amendment websites? Besides, this issue doesn't just boil down to speed but any form of access so effectively the question of net neutrality could even cover whether a website is just completely banned instead of just being slowed.
And yes, an internet provider does have the capability of slowing down traffic.
-
Neither. Again, I am not talking about the end user, I am talking about a content provider, a website. You paying more to get good speed is irrelevant if what you want is blocked or specifically slowed by an internet provider.
It seems you don't fully understand the history of this issue. Here is one of the actual specific issues that really brought this to light. Comcast, an internet provider, is also part owner of Hulu which is a direct competitor with Netflix. Comcast could then slow down the signal from Netflix instead prioritizing videos from Hulu. So use a little imagination and see how an internet provider could "slow" access to things they don't like. What if they "slowed" access pro second amendment websites? Besides, this issue doesn't just boil down to speed but any form of access so effectively the question of net neutrality could even cover whether a website is just completely banned instead of just being slowed.
And yes, an internet provider does have the capability of slowing down traffic.
Please cite examples you know of where either incoming, outgoing or both ISPs have decreased network speeds for specific websites in the past. They must have done this prior to Net Neutrality, or else the fear would be unfounded.
Please include links for your source material. Otherwise, as a career IT professional, I call total BS on your claims above.
ISPs will block entire sites if they decide the content of a site is illegal or against their terns of use policy. Other than that, they can't legally instigate random or selective interference of services. There is a customer either at the server ISP or client ISP. Neither of those will be on solid legal footing if they don't deliver the level of service the customer has paid for.
-
01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01100001 01110010 01100101 00100000 01110111 01100001 01110011 01110100 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 01110010 00100000 01110100 01101001 01101101 01100101 00100000 01000110 01010000
45 45 46 20 64 6f 6e 74 20 75 6e 64 65 72 73 74 61 6e 64 20 74 68 65 20 6e 65 74
-
68 65 79 20 65 65 66 20 77 68 61 74 20 69 73 20 61 6e 20 65 74 68 65 72 6e 65 74 20 66 72 61 6d 65 3f
-
01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01100001 01110010 01100101 00100000 01110111 01100001 01110011 01110100 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 01110010 00100000 01110100 01101001 01101101 01100101 00100000 01000110 01010000
01001001 00100000 01101010 01110101 01110011 01110100 00100000 01110111 01100001 01101110 01110100 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01111001 01100001 01101110 01101011 00100000 01101000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01100011 01101000 01100001 01101001 01101110 00101110 00100000 00100000 01001001 01110100 00100111 01110011 00100000 01100001 01101110 00100000 01100101 01100001 01110010 01101100 01111001 00100000 01000011 01101000 01110010 01101001 01110011 01110100 01101101 01100001 01110011 00100000 01100111 01101001 01100110 01110100 00100000 00101101 00101101 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01101101 01111001 01110011 01100101 01101100 01100110 00100001
-
68 65 79 20 65 65 66 20 77 68 61 74 20 69 73 20 61 6e 20 65 74 68 65 72 6e 65 74 20 66 72 61 6d 65 3f
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
01001001 00100000 01101010 01110101 01110011 01110100 00100000 01110111 01100001 01101110 01110100 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01111001 01100001 01101110 01101011 00100000 01101000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01100011 01101000 01100001 01101001 01101110 00101110 00100000 00100000 01001001 01110100 00100111 01110011 00100000 01100001 01101110 00100000 01100101 01100001 01110010 01101100 01111001 00100000 01000011 01101000 01110010 01101001 01110011 01110100 01101101 01100001 01110011 00100000 01100111 01101001 01100110 01110100 00100000 00101101 00101101 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01101101 01111001 01110011 01100101 01101100 01100110 00100001
6d 65 72 72 79 20 63 68 72 69 73 74 6d 61 73 20 48 65 27 73 20 6c 69 6b 65 20 61 20 47 49 20 6a 6f 65 20 77 69 74 68 20 62 72 6f 6b 65 6e 20 6b 75 6e 67 20 66 75 20 67 72 69 70
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ph6hXpPbl0s
-
6d 65 72 72 79 20 63 68 72 69 73 74 6d 61 73 20 48 65 27 73 20 6c 69 6b 65 20 61 20 47 49 20 6a 6f 65 20 77 69 74 68 20 62 72 6f 6b 65 6e 20 6b 75 6e 67 20 66 75 20 67 72 69 70
47 49 20 4a 6f 65 20 64 6f 6c 6c 20 68 61 73 20 6d 6f 72 65 20 6d 69 6c 69 74 61 72 79 20 73 6b 69 6c 6c 73 20 61 6e 64 20 6b 6e 6f 77 6c 65 64 67 65 2e
-
Neither. Again, I am not talking about the end user, I am talking about a content provider, a website. You paying more to get good speed is irrelevant if what you want is blocked or specifically slowed by an internet provider.
It seems you don't fully understand the history of this issue. Here is one of the actual specific issues that really brought this to light. Comcast, an internet provider, is also part owner of Hulu which is a direct competitor with Netflix. Comcast could then slow down the signal from Netflix instead prioritizing videos from Hulu. So use a little imagination and see how an internet provider could "slow" access to things they don't like. What if they "slowed" access pro second amendment websites? Besides, this issue doesn't just boil down to speed but any form of access so effectively the question of net neutrality could even cover whether a website is just completely banned instead of just being slowed.
And yes, an internet provider does have the capability of slowing down traffic.
Except for th fact that doing so would be illegal and regulated by the FTC,
Section 5(a)(1) of the FTC Act[4] prohibits “unfair methods of competition,” a term that courts have held encompasses all violations of the Sherman Act,[5] the primary federal antitrust law.[6] In applying Section 5, the FTC assesses most restrictive business agreements under the antitrust “rule of reason,” which seeks to determine whether the overall effect of a particular restraint is beneficial rather than harmful to the competitive process. A smaller category of “inherently bad” restrictive agreements will be condemned out of hand (without regard to any possible justifications) as “per se” illegal.
-
The FCC has been regulatory captured by industry. The foxes are in the hen house. It's a little naive to think they would take an anti monopolistic stance at this point. The ball was set in motion years ago when Clinton kicked off the first wave of media conglomeration.
-
The FCC has been regulatory captured by industry. The foxes are in the hen house. It's a little naive to think they would take an anti monopolistic stance at this point. The ball was set in motion years ago when Clinton kicked off the first wave of media conglomeration.
Yeah,yeah yeah. All kinds of bad stuff is going to happen... so you say. Anyone espousing the view of some version of "the end of the internet" just put your money where your mouth is and give us the timeline of exactly what is going to happen when, so we can see if your claims turn out to be true or false. Or would you (for some reason... easy to guess) rather just make apocalyptic generic predictions based upon ideological propaganda viewpoints while providing no ability at all to test the validity of your claims? Or is it like "global cooling" "global warming" "climate change" and none of us will know if it is true or not because the forecast is for the year 2100? But it's bad, really bad, and we need the government to intervene immediately and take control of the situation... especially given the government track record of running things efficiently and without any corruption or waste.
I will be posting this exact same comment on the GOP tax bill thread, where the same poster has posted the same generic arguments without providing any means of testing his hypothesis (now or any time in the future), merely substituting "end of the economy" for "end of the internet".
-
ISPs will block entire sites if they decide the content of a site is illegal or against their terns of use policy. Other than that, they can't legally instigate random or selective interference of services.
Please include links for your source material.
As for your question, here is an article about the Netflix Comcast issue in 2014.
https://consumerist.com/2014/02/23/netflix-agrees-to-pay-comcast-to-end-slowdown/
But lets say it never actually happened, lets say this was just a fear of something that had not manifested. Why not head it off anyway? Why not prevent it from happening in the future? Voter fraud hasn't been shown to be a large problem but we still want voter ID laws. So why not treat it like a public utility and say they have to provide equal service regardless of content?
What if your internet provider decided they didn't like pro 2nd amendment websites and blocked access to this website?
-
Except for th fact that doing so would be illegal and regulated by the FTC,
Section 5(a)(1) of the FTC Act[4] prohibits “unfair methods of competition,” a term that courts have held encompasses all violations of the Sherman Act,[5] the primary federal antitrust law.[6] In applying Section 5, the FTC assesses most restrictive business agreements under the antitrust “rule of reason,” which seeks to determine whether the overall effect of a particular restraint is beneficial rather than harmful to the competitive process. A smaller category of “inherently bad” restrictive agreements will be condemned out of hand (without regard to any possible justifications) as “per se” illegal.
Ok, certainly a legal argument to be made there. It seems like it would fall in the gray area though which could mean a lengthy and costly legal battle if an alleged violation occurred.
If your ISP decided they don't like 2ahawaii.com and blocked it or severely slowed its access speeds, would this be an antitrust issue? Not quite the same as the standard issue of a company edging out a competitor since this website and an ISP are not competitors nor do they provide the same services.
I am not saying you are wrong here but I think it would be a tough legal fight to prove was a violation were it to actually happen.
-
Please include links for your source material.
As for your question, here is an article about the Netflix Comcast issue in 2014.
https://consumerist.com/2014/02/23/netflix-agrees-to-pay-comcast-to-end-slowdown/
But lets say it never actually happened, lets say this was just a fear of something that had not manifested. Why not head it off anyway? Why not prevent it from happening in the future? Voter fraud hasn't been shown to be a large problem but we still want voter ID laws. So why not treat it like a public utility and say they have to provide equal service regardless of content?
What if your internet provider decided they didn't like pro 2nd amendment websites and blocked access to this website?
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Did you even understand the content of the link you posted??
...the drop in speeds wasn’t an issue of the ISP throttling or blocking service to Netflix.
Rather, the ISPs were allowing for Netflix traffic to bottleneck at what’s known as “peering ports,” the connection between
Netflix’s bandwidth provider and the ISPs.
Only you could post a source that says the exact opposite of the "fact" you tried to prove.
As for your making rules before there is ever a violation of them, it's not the government's place to make laws and rules for everything that might -- or might never -- happen.
Voter fraud not only happens, it happens more and more often, and without Voter ID laws, we will never know to what extent that problem has grown. You can't measure something that by its very nature involves hiding the truth.
-
Please include links for your source material.
As for your question, here is an article about the Netflix Comcast issue in 2014.
https://consumerist.com/2014/02/23/netflix-agrees-to-pay-comcast-to-end-slowdown/
But lets say it never actually happened, lets say this was just a fear of something that had not manifested. Why not head it off anyway? Why not prevent it from happening in the future? Voter fraud hasn't been shown to be a large problem but we still want voter ID laws. So why not treat it like a public utility and say they have to provide equal service regardless of content?
What if your internet provider decided they didn't like pro 2nd amendment websites and blocked access to this website?
53 65 63 74 69 6f 6e 20 35 28 61 29 28 31 29 20 6f 66 20 74 68 65 20 46 54 43 20 41 63 74 5b 34 5d 20 70 72 6f 68 69 62 69 74 73 20 e2 80 9c 75 6e 66 61 69 72 20 6d 65 74 68 6f 64 73 20 6f 66 20 63 6f 6d 70 65 74 69 74 69 6f 6e 2c e2 80 9d 20 61 20 74 65 72 6d 20 74 68 61 74 20 63 6f 75 72 74 73 20 68 61 76 65 20 68 65 6c 64 20 65 6e 63 6f 6d 70 61 73 73 65 73 20 61 6c 6c 20 76 69 6f 6c 61 74 69 6f 6e 73 20 6f 66 20 74 68 65 20 53 68 65 72 6d 61 6e 20 41 63 74 2c 5b 35 5d 20 74 68 65 20 70 72 69 6d 61 72 79 20 66 65 64 65 72 61 6c 20 61 6e 74 69 74 72 75 73 74 20 6c 61 77 2e 5b 36 5d 20 49 6e 20 61 70 70 6c 79 69 6e 67 20 53 65 63 74 69 6f 6e 20 35 2c 20 74 68 65 20 46 54 43 20 61 73 73 65 73 73 65 73 20 6d 6f 73 74 20 72 65 73 74 72 69 63 74 69 76 65 20 62 75 73 69 6e 65 73 73 20 61 67 72 65 65 6d 65 6e 74 73 20 75 6e 64 65 72 20 74 68 65 20 61 6e 74 69 74 72 75 73 74 20 e2 80 9c 72 75 6c 65 20 6f 66 20 72 65 61 73 6f 6e 2c e2 80 9d 20 77 68 69 63 68 20 73 65 65 6b 73 20 74 6f 20 64 65 74 65 72 6d 69 6e 65 20 77 68 65 74 68 65 72 20 74 68 65 20 6f 76 65 72 61 6c 6c 20 65 66 66 65 63 74 20 6f 66 20 61 20 70 61 72 74 69 63 75 6c 61 72 20 72 65 73 74 72 61 69 6e 74 20 69 73 20 62 65 6e 65 66 69 63 69 61 6c 20 72 61 74 68 65 72 20 74 68 61 6e 20 68 61 72 6d 66 75 6c 20 74 6f 20 74 68 65 20 63 6f 6d 70 65 74 69 74 69 76 65 20 70 72 6f 63 65 73 73 2e 20 41 20 73 6d 61 6c 6c 65 72 20 63 61 74 65 67 6f 72 79 20 6f 66 20 e2 80 9c 69 6e 68 65 72 65 6e 74 6c 79 20 62 61 64 e2 80 9d 20 72 65 73 74 72 69 63 74 69 76 65 20 61 67 72 65 65 6d 65 6e 74 73 20 77 69 6c 6c 20 62 65 20 63 6f 6e 64 65 6d 6e 65 64 20 6f 75 74 20 6f 66 20 68 61 6e 64 20 28 77 69 74 68 6f 75 74 20 72 65 67 61 72 64 20 74 6f 20 61 6e 79 20 70 6f 73 73 69 62 6c 65 20 6a 75 73 74 69 66 69 63 61 74 69 6f 6e 73 29 20 61 73 20 e2 80 9c 70 65 72 20 73 65 e2 80 9d 20 69 6c 6c 65 67 61 6c 2e 0d 0a
-
53 65 63 74 69 6f 6e 20 35 28 61 29 28 31 29 20 6f 66 20 74 68 65 20 46 54 43 20 41 63 74 5b 34 5d 20 70 72 6f 68 69 62 69 74 73 20 e2 80 9c 75 6e 66 61 69 72 20 6d 65 74 68 6f 64 73 20 6f 66 20 63 6f 6d 70 65 74 69 74 69 6f 6e 2c e2 80 9d 20 61 20 74 65 72 6d 20 74 68 61 74 20 63 6f 75 72 74 73 20 68 61 76 65 20 68 65 6c 64 20 65 6e 63 6f 6d 70 61 73 73 65 73 20 61 6c 6c 20 76 69 6f 6c 61 74 69 6f 6e 73 20 6f 66 20 74 68 65 20 53 68 65 72 6d 61 6e 20 41 63 74 2c 5b 35 5d 20 74 68 65 20 70 72 69 6d 61 72 79 20 66 65 64 65 72 61 6c 20 61 6e 74 69 74 72 75 73 74 20 6c 61 77 2e 5b 36 5d 20 49 6e 20 61 70 70 6c 79 69 6e 67 20 53 65 63 74 69 6f 6e 20 35 2c 20 74 68 65 20 46 54 43 20 61 73 73 65 73 73 65 73 20 6d 6f 73 74 20 72 65 73 74 72 69 63 74 69 76 65 20 62 75 73 69 6e 65 73 73 20 61 67 72 65 65 6d 65 6e 74 73 20 75 6e 64 65 72 20 74 68 65 20 61 6e 74 69 74 72 75 73 74 20 e2 80 9c 72 75 6c 65 20 6f 66 20 72 65 61 73 6f 6e 2c e2 80 9d 20 77 68 69 63 68 20 73 65 65 6b 73 20 74 6f 20 64 65 74 65 72 6d 69 6e 65 20 77 68 65 74 68 65 72 20 74 68 65 20 6f 76 65 72 61 6c 6c 20 65 66 66 65 63 74 20 6f 66 20 61 20 70 61 72 74 69 63 75 6c 61 72 20 72 65 73 74 72 61 69 6e 74 20 69 73 20 62 65 6e 65 66 69 63 69 61 6c 20 72 61 74 68 65 72 20 74 68 61 6e 20 68 61 72 6d 66 75 6c 20 74 6f 20 74 68 65 20 63 6f 6d 70 65 74 69 74 69 76 65 20 70 72 6f 63 65 73 73 2e 20 41 20 73 6d 61 6c 6c 65 72 20 63 61 74 65 67 6f 72 79 20 6f 66 20 e2 80 9c 69 6e 68 65 72 65 6e 74 6c 79 20 62 61 64 e2 80 9d 20 72 65 73 74 72 69 63 74 69 76 65 20 61 67 72 65 65 6d 65 6e 74 73 20 77 69 6c 6c 20 62 65 20 63 6f 6e 64 65 6d 6e 65 64 20 6f 75 74 20 6f 66 20 68 61 6e 64 20 28 77 69 74 68 6f 75 74 20 72 65 67 61 72 64 20 74 6f 20 61 6e 79 20 70 6f 73 73 69 62 6c 65 20 6a 75 73 74 69 66 69 63 61 74 69 6f 6e 73 29 20 61 73 20 e2 80 9c 70 65 72 20 73 65 e2 80 9d 20 69 6c 6c 65 67 61 6c 2e 0d 0a
That's why ignored him. He didn't read ahead. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
Worse case scenario is if there major abuse taking place on the internet in the future, you could pass net neutrality then. I don't see a need for it now.
-
Until then we guard ourselves from beings that live under the bridge. Stay vigilant!
-
https://www.theonion.com/world-agrees-to-just-take-down-internet-for-a-while-unt-1819579575
World Agrees To Just Take Down Internet For A While Until They Can Find A Good Use For It
Speaking to reporters, individuals across the globe cited social media as perhaps the internet’s most problematic component, having wrongly assumed it was wise to allow people to share their opinions via a tool that generously rewards whoever makes the most shocking and abhorrent statements most frequently.
But the populace also observed that the internet, originally designed as a way for research institutions to share data, was now largely a repository of sponsored content, pop-up ads, movies no one will ever watch, spam, elaborate identity theft schemes, bank accounts vulnerable to hacking, middle-aged men badly covering Aerosmith on YouTube, futile online petitions, grossly embellished OkCupid profiles, spyware, fan-generated Lord Of The Rings erotica, celebrity gossip, anti-Semitic memes, revenge porn, deceptive apartment listings, and death threats.
“The internet is horrible—there’s so much of this thing that people just shouldn’t be using at all,” said Graham Curtis, a 52-year-old Dublin, Ireland, resident. “I think the original idea was that you’d log on and express a viewpoint, and then someone else would express theirs. Then some kind of semi-constructive dialogue would take place. Instead, you go online and someone almost immediately tells you he’d laugh so hard if you offed yourself.”
-
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Did you even understand the content of the link you posted??
Only you could post a source that says the exact opposite of the "fact" you tried to prove.
As for your making rules before there is ever a violation of them, it's not the government's place to make laws and rules for everything that might -- or might never -- happen.
Voter fraud not only happens, it happens more and more often, and without Voter ID laws, we will never know to what extent that problem has grown. You can't measure something that by its very nature involves hiding the truth.
Yes, Netflix wasn't directly throttled but it was indirectly throttled but if you read more you can see where it did occur.
"Until recently, if peering ports became congested with downstream traffic, it was common practice for an ISP to temporarily open up new ports to maintain the flow of data. This was not a business arrangement; just something that had been done as a courtesy. ISPs would expect the bandwidth companies to do the same if there was a spike in upstream traffic. However, there is virtually no upstream traffic with Netflix, so the Comcasts and Verizons of the world claimed they were being taken advantage of."
So where other companies opened up new ports to maintain the flow of data during spikes they didn't do that for Netflix. So is it a glaring violation? No but enough to raise the issue of net neutrality.
Liberals always point out that there is little to no evidence of voter fraud that a voter ID law would solve and you are using the same logic here. Why do you have to wait for the problem to arrive before doing something to stop it? No one flew buildings into airplanes until they did then everyone asked why there weren't measures in place to have prevented it.
So yes, while there may not have been a serious issue here I still think there is enough reason for the government to treat ISPs like utilities and have some regulations.
What is the big argument against net neutrality? I get the general push against larger government but what specifically about net neutrality legislation is so harmful?
-
53 65 63 74 69 6f 6e 20 35 28 61 29 28 31 29 20 6f 66 20 74 68 65 20 46 54 43 20 41 63 74 5b 34 5d 20 70 72 6f 68 69 62 69 74 73 20 e2 80 9c 75 6e 66 61 69 72 20 6d 65 74 68 6f 64 73 20 6f 66 20 63 6f 6d 70 65 74 69 74 69 6f 6e 2c e2 80 9d 20 61 20 74 65 72 6d 20 74 68 61 74 20 63 6f 75 72 74 73 20 68 61 76 65 20 68 65 6c 64 20 65 6e 63 6f 6d 70 61 73 73 65 73 20 61 6c 6c 20 76 69 6f 6c 61 74 69 6f 6e 73 20 6f 66 20 74 68 65 20 53 68 65 72 6d 61 6e 20 41 63 74 2c 5b 35 5d 20 74 68 65 20 70 72 69 6d 61 72 79 20 66 65 64 65 72 61 6c 20 61 6e 74 69 74 72 75 73 74 20 6c 61 77 2e 5b 36 5d 20 49 6e 20 61 70 70 6c 79 69 6e 67 20 53 65 63 74 69 6f 6e 20 35 2c 20 74 68 65 20 46 54 43 20 61 73 73 65 73 73 65 73 20 6d 6f 73 74 20 72 65 73 74 72 69 63 74 69 76 65 20 62 75 73 69 6e 65 73 73 20 61 67 72 65 65 6d 65 6e 74 73 20 75 6e 64 65 72 20 74 68 65 20 61 6e 74 69 74 72 75 73 74 20 e2 80 9c 72 75 6c 65 20 6f 66 20 72 65 61 73 6f 6e 2c e2 80 9d 20 77 68 69 63 68 20 73 65 65 6b 73 20 74 6f 20 64 65 74 65 72 6d 69 6e 65 20 77 68 65 74 68 65 72 20 74 68 65 20 6f 76 65 72 61 6c 6c 20 65 66 66 65 63 74 20 6f 66 20 61 20 70 61 72 74 69 63 75 6c 61 72 20 72 65 73 74 72 61 69 6e 74 20 69 73 20 62 65 6e 65 66 69 63 69 61 6c 20 72 61 74 68 65 72 20 74 68 61 6e 20 68 61 72 6d 66 75 6c 20 74 6f 20 74 68 65 20 63 6f 6d 70 65 74 69 74 69 76 65 20 70 72 6f 63 65 73 73 2e 20 41 20 73 6d 61 6c 6c 65 72 20 63 61 74 65 67 6f 72 79 20 6f 66 20 e2 80 9c 69 6e 68 65 72 65 6e 74 6c 79 20 62 61 64 e2 80 9d 20 72 65 73 74 72 69 63 74 69 76 65 20 61 67 72 65 65 6d 65 6e 74 73 20 77 69 6c 6c 20 62 65 20 63 6f 6e 64 65 6d 6e 65 64 20 6f 75 74 20 6f 66 20 68 61 6e 64 20 28 77 69 74 68 6f 75 74 20 72 65 67 61 72 64 20 74 6f 20 61 6e 79 20 70 6f 73 73 69 62 6c 65 20 6a 75 73 74 69 66 69 63 61 74 69 6f 6e 73 29 20 61 73 20 e2 80 9c 70 65 72 20 73 65 e2 80 9d 20 69 6c 6c 65 67 61 6c 2e 0d 0a
I replied to him and explained why I didn't think that section applied. Maybe you should read ahead.
-
Worse case scenario is if there major abuse taking place on the internet in the future, you could pass net neutrality then. I don't see a need for it now.
I do understand that sentiment but here would be why I am not sure that is wise. The internet has become a means of influencing politics and politicians. If the day came where ISPs were throttling down or blocking a particular political idea, it is going to be much harder to then spread the message that we need net neutrality because those being slowed who would then want/need net neutrality are the ones who wouldn't be able to politic as easily. So for example, if ISPs blocked all pro gun information on the internet it would be more difficult for us to lobby for net neutrality to protect gun rights. Kind of like saying we will pass gun rights only when the government starts becoming tyrannical.
-
:rofl:
-
No one flew buildings into airplanes
uhhhhh........
-
uhhhhh........
Trolls shouldn't stand up while under bridge. Hit head and lose it
-
uhhhhh........
Read the rest of the sentence genius.
-
Read the rest of the sentence genius.
I have, multiple times, sill not making any sense
I guess i'm not a genious like you
-
Yes, Netflix wasn't directly throttled but it was indirectly throttled but if you read more you can see where it did occur.
"Until recently, if peering ports became congested with downstream traffic, it was common practice for an ISP to temporarily open up new ports to maintain the flow of data. This was not a business arrangement; just something that had been done as a courtesy. ISPs would expect the bandwidth companies to do the same if there was a spike in upstream traffic. However, there is virtually no upstream traffic with Netflix, so the Comcasts and Verizons of the world claimed they were being taken advantage of."
So where other companies opened up new ports to maintain the flow of data during spikes they didn't do that for Netflix. So is it a glaring violation? No but enough to raise the issue of net neutrality.
Liberals always point out that there is little to no evidence of voter fraud that a voter ID law would solve and you are using the same logic here. Why do you have to wait for the problem to arrive before doing something to stop it? No one flew buildings into airplanes until they did then everyone asked why there weren't measures in place to have prevented it.
So yes, while there may not have been a serious issue here I still think there is enough reason for the government to treat ISPs like utilities and have some regulations.
What is the big argument against net neutrality? I get the general push against larger government but what specifically about net neutrality legislation is so harmful?
I guess your Googler is still broken? It's starting to look like it's the operator, not the tool ...
Net neutrality is the notion that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) shouldn't be able to "slow down, speed up,
or block data as it is routed from its content originator to end users" in order to favor particular sites. The
net neutrality regulations put in place under the Obama administration involved subjecting the Internet to
Title II of the 1934 Communications Act, where it's considered a public utility that is subject to the iron grip of
the FCC.
The FCC is now trying to kill these regulations, and they are right to do so. Here are seven reasons why.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/18613/7-reasons-net-neutrality-idiotic-aaron-bandler
-
With the lower corporate tax rate, companies will buy back stocks from investors who will then need something else to invest in and they'll see all of these frustrated internet users who are complaining about unresponsive IPs and will invest their money into a different kind of internet innovation that isn't controlled by the IPs. It could happen...