Slashdot Mirror


Net Neutrality Goes Down in Flames as FCC Votes To Kill Title II Rules (arstechnica.com)

As we feared yesterday, the rollback of net neutrality rules officially began today. The FCC voted along party lines today to formally consider Chairman Ajit Pai's plan to scrap the legal foundation for the rules and to ask the public for comments on the future of prohibitions on blocking, throttling and paid prioritization. ArsTechnica adds: The Federal Communications Commission voted 2-1 today to start the process of eliminating net neutrality rules and the classification of home and mobile Internet service providers as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposes eliminating the Title II classification and seeks comment on what, if anything, should replace the current net neutrality rules. But Chairman Ajit Pai is making no promises about reinstating the two-year-old net neutrality rules that forbid ISPs from blocking or throttling lawful Internet content, or prioritizing content in exchange for payment. Pai's proposal argues that throttling websites and applications might somehow help Internet users.

24 of 422 comments (clear)

  1. It's a sad day for America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Feels like we've had a lot of those lately.

  2. Internet Treason. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The internet was NOT invented for ISP profitability. Fuck this treasonous noise.

    1. Re:Internet Treason. by Rob+Y. · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A quick Google search turned up this article from 2015 stating that the internet at the time was 6 percent of the us economy. I don't know if that number's right, and even if so, the percentage is probably higher now. But my point is that, without Net Neutrality, it would be nowhere near as big. In fact, it might not have beaten out the likes of Compuserve and MSN, which had pretty much zero effect on the overall economy.

      So to the extent that the Internet is a major engine of the growth Republicans always seem to point to as their magic bullet to justify any and all of their policies - they have just blindly asserted that "we've had all the innovation we need, thank you - it's time for the toll collectors to cash in".

      https://www.usnews.com/news/bl...

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
  3. crimes against humanity... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These are crimes against humanity... some day there will be a reckoning

    1. Re:crimes against humanity... by wickerprints · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When civilization has reached the point where open access to information is a necessary component to personal liberty and critical decision making, the curtailing of neutral access in favor of preferential access based on monetary criteria is the first step toward societies in which people are starved and beaten. That you fail to appreciate this causal relationship only underscores the futility of your use of expletives.

    2. Re: crimes against humanity... by Qzukk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      One way would be to send Pizza Hut a bill for $1,000,000. Then, if they don't pay, you set your DNS servers to resolve pizzahut.com to the IP of someone who will pay. Also, redirect all DNS packets to 8.8.8.8 or whatever other DNS services to your own in order to guarantee that the 99.999% of the customers not using a hosts file to resolve pizzahut.com will get pizzas from the company that paid.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  4. All over except for the shouting by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If it isn't crystal-clear to everyone by now, let me state the obvious for your benefit: The FCC, which apparently is in the hip pocket of ISPs and wireless companies, does not give a flying fuck about what the citizens of the U.S. actually want the Internet to be, all they care about is being Good Little Doggies for their corporate patrons. On the other hand the Baby Boomer generation will probably love it; the Internet will likely become like a larger version of AOL.

    1. Re:All over except for the shouting by Dog-Cow · · Score: 5, Insightful

      All forms of regulation are bad, if you're a billionaire looking to keep the spigot flowing. The second part of your statement is wrong, however. No one involved here wants a free market. Free markets allow competition. They want monopolies without government oversight. That's all.

    2. Re:All over except for the shouting by i_ate_god · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Removing Trump won't remove the ideology.

      --
      I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
    3. Re:All over except for the shouting by green1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What opponents of Net Neutrality fail to realize is that despite the fact that the actual net neutrality laws were relatively new, for the most part (except for a few incidents that caused the laws to be enacted) we've always had net neutrality in the past.
      Now the reasons were different, originally net neutrality existed because it was simply too hard and expensive for a provider to discriminate. The equipment to do so was expensive, and to do so on a large scale without killing your throughput was simply prohibitive. Additionally it was simply that corporations hadn't even thought of it.

      Once the equipment to filter became easily accessible, and corporations thought of how to monetize it, they immediately started screwing with the internet. Luckily at the time, the FCC saw what was happening and fixed it.

      People who think that by removing the laws we'll go back to a point before companies had the technical ability, and inclination to screw with the internet have completely forgotten the actual incidents that caused the FCC to act in the first place, the proof that ISPs aren't going to suddenly forget that there's a whole lot of money to be made in trying to turn the internet in to cable TV.

    4. Re:All over except for the shouting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Dog-Cow was not wrong, your interpretation of his statement was wrong.

      "Free Market" does not mean "unregulated market." It means "open to competition." Markets are "free" if competitors can easily enter or exit the market, adjust their prices, switch out their partners, etc. Sustaining such a market requires government intervention, for the very reason you gave.

      As soon as an unregulated market becomes dominated by a cartel or monopoly, it is no longer free.

      Is that clear? You are wrong in thinking that free markets must lack cartel-busting laws in order to qualify as free. Even a market heavily regulated by government might still qualify as free (if those regulations don't create a cartel/monopoly, but instead maintain an environment of open competition).

  5. Corruption has now consumed the USA by orev · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Corruption is the biggest thing our founders were worried about as a threat to our form of government. For years it has been getting worse and worse. We've finally reached the point of critical mass and are now in a snowball or thermal runaway type of situation where we cannot recover.

    1. Re:Corruption has now consumed the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And, with Net Neutrality officially dead, they can steer you away from open websites where you might see free opinions, and towards their corporate gardens where there are no nasty alternate opinions.

      If you want to do at least something to stop this, stop using Facebook, any of the Disney sites (ABC,ESPN,etc.) and any others that no doubt will gain from this.

      NN would not really be an issue if Americans had meaningful access to more than one high speed internet service provider. We could "vote with our dollars." However, at this time, many of us have only two options. Vote for the single provider of service, or go without.

    2. Re:Corruption has now consumed the USA by green1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There never was a "before NN".

      Before NN laws we had defacto NN. But there is no possible way to go back to defacto NN because the cat is out of the bag, the technical ability to mess with the internet is now cheap and easy to implement, and providers have realized that there's money to be made in doing so.

      Asking if there was a problem before net-neutrality laws, while ignoring the specific cases that caused those laws to be implemented in the first place, is like saying we don't need traffic laws because there were no car crashes before cars were invented. Simply repealing the speed limit won't magically make people trade their cars for horse and buggies.

  6. The life cycle of the Internet by Baron_Yam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From a system designed to ensure information flows no matter what... to a system designed to ensure selected information flows at a rate determined by your wallet.

    Another change to America that will squeeze the 99% for the enrichment of the 1%, sold with the lie that they're doing it for the exact opposite reason.

    You know, I'm not big on class warfare but at some point you have to realize that your society is going to shit if its primary focus is to benefit a small subset of the population to the detriment of the majority.

  7. Alternative Headline: by chuckugly · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Alternative Headline: "Thing That Never Made Any Difference Never Will" When regs that never went into force are pruned in the forest, does anyone make a sound? I guess they do.

    1. Re:Alternative Headline: by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What are you talking about? After Netflix pays Comcast, speeds improve 65%

      How retarded can you be?

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  8. Re:Ignorant voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sadly, the opportunity to vote against the current cabal is being limited by them. In what will amount to a virtual return to the poll tax and literacy tests of old, the VP is heading a commission almost certain to find the non-existent voter fraud in order to justify extreme voter suppression (oops, I mean vetting) by requiring proof of citizenship for new voters, but nothing to assure that grandma is really the one filling out her mail in ballot, and certainly not scrubbing them from the voter lists.

    Their tactics are clearly designed to keep new voters out, who are most likely to oppose their policies. It is not at all about integrity of the vote. (Integrity, now that's a funny word.)

  9. Re:Ignorant voters by JustNiz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No this is the fault of having a 2 party system. You have to buy into the whole package, or the other whole package. There is no sane option.

  10. Re:Because capitalism! by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of the things I always told my kids growing up is that a piece of the truth is almost useless by itself; you need enough of the whole truth to understand what's going on.

    The piece of truth you learn in capitalism Sunday school is that businesses try to maximize profits and that this forces them to innovate. This is true, but it misses the other part of the truth: businesses also try to minimize risk, and this cuts against the innovation impulse.

    It's the force of competition that makes businesses take risks and thus innovate, and nowhere is the competition fiercer than in a commodity market. That's why businesses want to differentiate their products, and that's what net discrimination is all about. They want to make it impossible to compare different services by making it impossible or difficult to get content except through certain channels. Expect exclusive deals so you'll find yourself choosing between getting local baseball programming on one provider or the latest Star Trek series on another.

    It's all about hanging onto customers, and there's two ways to do that: to make them happy, or make it painful to leave. Of the two, making it painful to leave is less risky.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  11. Re:Ignorant voters by parallel_prankster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While I am agree to your comment, I am still amazed by the extent of Republican corruption this year. And yes, the DNC had their share too but it pales compared to whats going on now with the power structure on Republican side with the Healthcare bill, the budget and scandals etc!

  12. Welcome to Cable TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Internet is soon going to be like Cable TV you have to choose your internet package

    Basic
    Economy
    Premium

  13. Re: Because capitalism! by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure. Look at how Internet service worked on cell phone networks before Apple blew the old system up with the iPhone. Apple didn't do this out of idealism, but because it couldn't differentiate itself in an environment where the carriers controlled the user experience.

    In fact in general look at how inferior US cell service is to the rest of the developed world. This was a result of a deliberate calculation by the Reagan administration that a more innovative network would result if carriers were free to choose their own standards. What they did was try to make it as painful as possible to change carriers while nickel-and-diming their subscribers for all they were worth. It was a safe, profitable strategy, like auto companies taking their mediocre old car platforms and putting exciting new bodies on them.

    Meanwhile, in Internet services the competition is cutthroat because a level playing field is baked into the very architecture of the system, and innovation has been moving too fast for ISPs and cellular carriers to tie down their customer bases with "exclusive content". But it is coming. I've dealt with these people before and that's their wet dream: a captive customer base.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  14. Re:Ignorant voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The Republicans made a Faustian bargain and put their hat in with Trump to gain favor with a good 30% of the voter base that unshakably believes everything the far-right media pushes.

    Much to their their horror, it worked.