Slashdot Mirror
Net Neutrality Advocates Plan Protests For December 7 at Verizon Stores (techcrunch.com)
Jordan Crook, writing for TechCrunch: During yesterday's announcement of the upcoming vote, the FCC neglected to mention the historic 22 million comments on the issue, the majority of which were opposed to its rollback. In response, protests are being held on December 7 at Verizon retail stores across the country. The protests were organized by Demand Progress, Fight For The Future, and FreePress Action Fund. Here's what the protest organizers have to say on their event page: "Ajit Pai is clearly still working for Verizon, not the public. But he still has to answer to Congress. So we're calling on our lawmakers to do their job overseeing the FCC and speak out against Ajit Pai's plan to gut Title II net neutrality protections and give Verizon and other giant ISPs everything on their holiday wishlist.
Pai said from the get-go that public commentary would not impact his decision. He's making regulations that financially benefit him and his cronies, in direct opposition to both public welfare and public demand. It's clear that this is simply one more example of corporate hijacking of our political system -- they're just going through the motions to make it seem legitimate.
If that asshole's pacemaker has a minimum bandwidth requirement to keep him safe, there is something critically wrong with that asshole's pacemaker.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
You're a bit confused on what net neutrality is about. It's about treating all data [b]of the same type[/b] the same. So that means treating youtube, dailymotion, netflix, and other video providers the same (including video services they themselves own). They are free to shape data of a given type if that type of data is causing trouble for their network.
So yes it theoretically prevents them from partnering with Netflix to not count their traffic against your cap while not offering the same to all other video providers but that's a good thing because it forces them to be a neutral service provider which is what they should be. They can't threaten Netflix with slowing their traffic unless they pay them money like certain ISPs have been trying. They can't sell customers faster access (or prevent access without extra payment) to Netflix but let you use their service without paying extra.
This is about making sure ISPs can't double-charge (both you and the content provider) to transmit data across their network. It's about making sure that the ISPs provide services without bias just like power, water, gas, and phone providers.
All of the issues you mentioned were resolved without NN rules in place, so obviously in the end they did not ed up being issues of any import, just stupid ideas. Even without NN rues in place all of the things you list would be stopped by today's FCC, so why does it matter NN rules were dropped?
I'm not saying ISP's will never do anything stupid, I am asking people to point out some stupid thing they will do that will actually harm people long term specific to NN rules being dropped.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley