Support NeoGAF

[greycolumbus]

Reddit/4chan meltdown in 5...4....

His intentions were clear for almost a year. No one will care.

http://time.com/4150891/republican-debate-donald-trump-internet/
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/532608358508167168

 

[Seth Enosh]

If you sometimes use a torrent client, prepare for some drastic speed degradation, and a premium option to return to what you have now.
And that's only one example among many things they could use to make you pay more. They could blackmail Steam by threatening to reduce the download speed for Valve's customers. Or they could increase your ping for games and propose you another premium for it.

And since your choice of ISP is very limited, they could easily get away with it for a lot of customers. All they'd have to do is collusion between, say, Verizon and Comcast, and you'd have no choice but to accept the limitations or pay more.


Give four years to these republicans, and they'll set your economy back to 2008, and make you lose three decades of social progress...

I don't torrent or pirate content (I guess I've downloaded a linux distro once or twice on torrents, but if it were a bit slower, it wouldn't have mattered), so I'm not particularly worried about ISPs cracking down on people that do. Legal content sites might strike peering deals if needed, paying ISPs out of their subscription revenue similar to how netflix had to pay off Verizon fairly recently. It won't affect me in any real way - maybe a few more cents on my bill. I think the apocalyptic rhetoric about net neutrality in here is overblown - net neutrality proponents have rarely been able to point to ISPs abusing their power in the way they predict will happen.

Like many industries, landline ISPs can self-regulate around net neutrality principles to avoid government regulation landing on them - similar to how the ESRB self-regulates the gaming industry to avoid government restrictions on gaming content. The ideas posted in here that ISPs are going to block reddit and 4chan, etc., seem pretty ridiculous to me. Even a Trump FCC or Republican Congress would start moving on these issues if stuff like that actually happened to large numbers of people - the main argument of conservatives against net neutrality has always been that the ISPs haven't proven to be untrustworthy on this stuff. For instance, this 2010 piece in NPR saying "the FCC cites only two isolated and quickly remedied instances of alleged discriminatory conduct by ISPs. Indeed, the commission does not even argue that any market failure threatens the Internet's current openness".

Next-generation 5G wireless ISPs will also help increase the competitiveness of the marketplace and offer an alternative - an approximation of net neutrality is the natural outcome of a competitive marketplace anyway.

YIKES. So much BS. I'm going to skip you equivocating the 90s internet to the internet of today and the reshaped landscape and importance of internet in general. If you do not understand this, then there is no helping you.

Net neutrality, as accepted and enforced by the FCC, applies largely to landline, or hard wired internet. This is largely because the technology and infrastructure is there to facilitate a truly neutral network. On mobile/wireless, the laws of physics of wireless communication demand more prioritization due to the well known weaknesses related to capacity and bandwidth. Hence, the FCC doesn't impose the same net neutrality rules on wireless communications. This is why T-Mobile is allowed to waive data limits for select websites or streams. They aren't violating Net Neutrality.

Care to explain how the laws of physics let T-Mobile stream unlimited GBs of music to my phone, yet limit all other data to 2GB? Perhaps I'm missing some law of physics that lets Spotify send me bits that don't take up wireless spectrum.

I am quite aware of the importance of internet in general. I'm also aware that net neutrality in the USA has only existed since 2014, after previous attempts by the FCC were repeatedly rebuffed by the courts. My internet worked fine before 2014 and it will work fine after Trump's FCC gets rid of net neutrality. Yes, there may be some arguments in favor of net neutrality, but the people in this thread acting as if the Internet is being shut down don't seem to understand that net neutrality as a law isn't actually that important to the Internet being useful or used.

 

[The Maverick]

I don't torrent or pirate content (I guess I've downloaded a linux distro once or twice on torrents, but if it were a bit slower, it wouldn't have mattered), so I'm not particularly worried about ISPs cracking down on people that do. Legal content sites might strike peering deals if needed, paying ISPs out of their subscription revenue similar to how netflix had to pay off Verizon fairly recently. It won't affect me in any real way - maybe a few more cents on my bill. I think the apocalyptic rhetoric about net neutrality in here is overblown - net neutrality proponents have rarely been able to point to ISPs abusing their power in the way they predict will happen.

Like many industries, landline ISPs can self-regulate around net neutrality principles to avoid government regulation landing on them - similar to how the ESRB self-regulates the gaming industry to avoid government restrictions on gaming content. The ideas posted in here that ISPs are going to block reddit and 4chan, etc., seem pretty ridiculous to me. Even a Trump FCC or Republican Congress would start moving on these issues if stuff like that actually happened to large numbers of people - the main argument of conservatives against net neutrality has always been that the ISPs haven't proven to be untrustworthy on this stuff. For instance, this 2010 piece in NPR saying "the FCC cites only two isolated and quickly remedied instances of alleged discriminatory conduct by ISPs. Indeed, the commission does not even argue that any market failure threatens the Internet's current openness".

Next-generation 5G wireless ISPs will also help increase the competitiveness of the marketplace and offer an alternative - an approximation of net neutrality is the natural outcome of a competitive marketplace anyway.


Care to explain how the laws of physics let T-Mobile stream unlimited GBs of music to my phone, yet limit all other data to 2GB? Perhaps I'm missing some law of physics that lets Spotify send me bits that don't take up wireless spectrum.

I am quite aware of the importance of internet in general. I'm also aware that net neutrality in the USA has only existed since 2014, after previous attempts by the FCC were repeatedly rebuffed by the courts. My internet worked fine before 2014 and it will work fine after Trump's FCC gets rid of net neutrality. Yes, there may be some arguments in favor of net neutrality, but the people in this thread acting as if the Internet is being shut down don't seem to understand that net neutrality as a law isn't actually that important to the Internet being useful or used.

I'll address the bolded in order.

1. "It doesn't affect me so I don't care." This is a bad argument, and one I think we'll hear often in the next 4 years.

2. If you fundamentally don't understand how ISPs can throttle data usage, then I'm not sure you possess the breadth of knowledge necessary to have this conversation. I don't say that to be an ass, but if you don't understand something that simple, then I'd think you need to do more research to formulate an educated opinion.

3. Net neutrality nullification is the biggest threat that internet users in the US face. You're underselling the potential impact of such legislation. ISPs will have their hands in the pockets of users and content providers. It'll drastically change the way that data is delivered to the average citizen.

 

[Funky Papa]

And now I wonder if this will have any impact on the porntubes and their availability/quality. Because you know some people are going to be aching to go after them with all kinds of "think of the children" laws.

Time to brace for a new kind of throttling.

 

[Bold One]

Tim Berners-Lee is going to have a rant about the UK and US soon.

Dude must be feeling like the Oppenheimer of our time

 

[marc^o^]

The world will obviously go forward for the next four years.

Dear US friends, I'm sorry for what is happening to you.

 

[Sevenfold]

Have I got time for a couple of rounds of Rocket League?

 

[Hoo-doo]

At this point the planet should just put in effort to keep all this madness contained inside the borders of the US.

Build that wall. Not to keep people out, but to keep the insanity from spreading to the rest of the world. There have to be countries where rational thought can still prevail.

 

[Funky Papa]

I'm also wondering if some ISPs will be tempted to put a cap to online gaming because "low latency applications put undue stress on our network" (actual words heard from a major European telecom).

At this point the planet should just put in effort to keep all this madness contained inside the borders of the US.

Build that wall. Not to keep people out, but to keep the insanity from spreading to the rest of the world.

This is the part where I'm damn glad for the EU passing its own strong net neutrality laws. Specially given that our pro-business conservatives *love* to take notes from everything wrong going down in America and try to import it here.

 

[marc^o^]

At this point the planet should just put in effort to keep all this madness contained inside the borders of the US.

Build that wall. Not to keep people out, but to keep the insanity from spreading to the rest of the world. There have to be countries where rational thought can still prevail.

Trump actually makes Europe and other parts of the world great again.

 

[Chichikov]

Dude must be feeling like the Oppenheimer of our time

He should, Html is worse than nuclear winter.

 

[Antiwhippy]

He should, Html is worse than nuclear winter.

With Trump, why not both?

 

[Keihart]

I don't torrent or pirate content (I guess I've downloaded a linux distro once or twice on torrents, but if it were a bit slower, it wouldn't have mattered), so I'm not particularly worried about ISPs cracking down on people that do. Legal content sites might strike peering deals if needed, paying ISPs out of their subscription revenue similar to how netflix had to pay off Verizon fairly recently. It won't affect me in any real way - maybe a few more cents on my bill. I think the apocalyptic rhetoric about net neutrality in here is overblown - net neutrality proponents have rarely been able to point to ISPs abusing their power in the way they predict will happen.

Like many industries, landline ISPs can self-regulate around net neutrality principles to avoid government regulation landing on them - similar to how the ESRB self-regulates the gaming industry to avoid government restrictions on gaming content. The ideas posted in here that ISPs are going to block reddit and 4chan, etc., seem pretty ridiculous to me. Even a Trump FCC or Republican Congress would start moving on these issues if stuff like that actually happened to large numbers of people - the main argument of conservatives against net neutrality has always been that the ISPs haven't proven to be untrustworthy on this stuff. For instance, this 2010 piece in NPR saying "the FCC cites only two isolated and quickly remedied instances of alleged discriminatory conduct by ISPs. Indeed, the commission does not even argue that any market failure threatens the Internet's current openness".

Next-generation 5G wireless ISPs will also help increase the competitiveness of the marketplace and offer an alternative - an approximation of net neutrality is the natural outcome of a competitive marketplace anyway.


Care to explain how the laws of physics let T-Mobile stream unlimited GBs of music to my phone, yet limit all other data to 2GB? Perhaps I'm missing some law of physics that lets Spotify send me bits that don't take up wireless spectrum.

I am quite aware of the importance of internet in general. I'm also aware that net neutrality in the USA has only existed since 2014, after previous attempts by the FCC were repeatedly rebuffed by the courts. My internet worked fine before 2014 and it will work fine after Trump's FCC gets rid of net neutrality. Yes, there may be some arguments in favor of net neutrality, but the people in this thread acting as if the Internet is being shut down don't seem to understand that net neutrality as a law isn't actually that important to the Internet being useful or used.

On mobile networks the bandwidth per cell is limited but the number of subscribers connecting to it aren't, which isn't the same on landlines where the access point is dimensioned according to the maximum number of subscribers of the area.

The speed between the access point and the MEN network isn't really a problem in the present, the only part that really makes ISPs spend more is the international link, wich is more than capable to handle double or more of present traffic but regardless ISPs have to pay per data.

ISPs want more money because cable TV is becoming irrelevant while Netflix and similar services are getting all the money. They are butt hurt and salty or greedy but not really in any right to charge more or differentiate traffic.

 

[Hitman]

Republicans so obviously work for the benefit of corporations and not the people.

What is depressing is everyone here and the media will deride the politicians but the corporations that pay them off go unscathed and unaccounted for.

 

[A Serious Man]

These next four years are going to be fucking bleak.

 

[FyreWulff]

I'm also aware that net neutrality in the USA has only existed since 2014, after previous attempts by the FCC were repeatedly rebuffed by the courts. My internet worked fine before 2014 and it will work fine after Trump's FCC gets rid of net neutrality.

No. No. Nah. Nope.

Net neutrality, as a phrase and concept, existed WELL before 2014, and is the way the internet was expected to work and was de facto run that way since it's inception. I remember talking with people about it on fucking Slashdot in 1999. It's older than even that.

The FCC was trying to finally codify it into law because some content providers started overreaching the gentlemen's agreement that had existed to that point.

 

[Jarmel]

I am quite aware of the importance of internet in general. I'm also aware that net neutrality in the USA has only existed since 2014, after previous attempts by the FCC were repeatedly rebuffed by the courts. My internet worked fine before 2014 and it will work fine after Trump's FCC gets rid of net neutrality. Yes, there may be some arguments in favor of net neutrality, but the people in this thread acting as if the Internet is being shut down don't seem to understand that net neutrality as a law isn't actually that important to the Internet being useful or used.

^Yep that's a poster that doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

Absolutely insane that people defend corporate activities designed to fuck them over.

 

[FyreWulff]

Example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Opportunity,_Promotion_and_Enhancement_Bill_of_2006

a bill in 2006 that specifically named net neutrality, supported by 3 Republicans and 1 Democrat.

 

[Spiral Insanity]

I like how he can be far more of a corrupt liar than anyone and yet somehow gets a free pass for all of it.

Yayyy

Because ultimately his strongest supporters voted on him/his party because they are terrified of muslims, hate black people, and don't want mexicans to take their job.

 

[Draft]

Bad news but literally any generic Republican President Elect would have appointed the same types of guys. While our country will have to deal with many disasters unique to President Trump, this disaster is 100% home grown Republican Free Market Solutions.

 

[cyress8]

Sounds great! Cannot wait until Comcast reverts my data cap back to 300 GB also.

 

[ChryZ]

Imagine all the chillin' you can get done while Netflix is buffering.

 

[Seth Enosh]

1. "It doesn't affect me so I don't care." This is a bad argument, and one I think we'll hear often in the next 4 years.

2. If you fundamentally don't understand how ISPs can throttle data usage, then I'm not sure you possess the breadth of knowledge necessary to have this conversation. I don't say that to be an ass, but if you don't understand something that simple, then I'd think you need to do more research to formulate an educated opinion.

3. Net neutrality nullification is the biggest threat that internet users in the US face. You're underselling the potential impact of such legislation. ISPs will have their hands in the pockets of users and content providers. It'll drastically change the way that data is delivered to the average citizen.

1. Nah, it's a great argument. It makes a lot of sense to care about things that affect you or others. Something like net neutrality doesn't really matter compared to other issues. If it doesn't hit you in the pocketbook, why should consumers care? I'm perfectly happy to let some mega corps slug it out with each other over pennies.

2. Do you understand what I'm talking about? T-Mobile zero rates certain kinds of data, not counting it against the cap. For instance, I have a 2GB tmobile 4G plan. But I can download unlimited music from blessed streaming sites (Spotify, iTunes, Google Play Music, etc.) and it doesn't count against the cap. There's no law of physics allowing that, as I pointed out - their violation of net neutrality principles is in no way prompted by physics. The same bits from a Spotify MP3 don't count against the cap, but if I stream those same bits from my DropBox, they count on my cap. That said, I don't really care, and neither do their other customers.

3. Let's see. I expect the gentlemen's agreement to continue in force (with known exceptions such as NetFlix having to pay FiOS extra for peering - something that's still happening under the FCC regulations right now). Customers won't be happy if companies try what people in this thread think is going to happen.

No. No. Nah. Nope.

Net neutrality, as a phrase and concept, existed WELL before 2014, and is the way the internet was expected to work and was de facto run that way since it's inception. I remember talking with people about it on fucking Slashdot in 1999. It's older than even that.

The FCC was trying to finally codify it into law because some content providers started overreaching the gentlemen's agreement that had existed to that point.

I'm well aware of that, which is why I pointed out the previous attempts to push net neutrality that were struck down by the courts. I also said, in this thread, "an approximation of net neutrality is the natural outcome of a competitive marketplace anyway." This is the gentlemen's agreement that you're talking about. AOL, earthlink, etc. started out as walled gardens and then opened up to the full internet because it made business sense and that's what customers want - people don't want to pay for just twitter and facebook and be blocked from the 100s of less popular long-tail websites they might visit individually.

The FCC net neutrality regulation only dates to 2014 not because of content providers and ISPs starting to act out at that time, but because their previous efforts had been rejected by the courts and they were now trying a new approach to getting the regulation in place. I remember people talking about net neutrality a decade ago on public radio and at that time they weren't able to point to any specific causes to put the regulation in place, but still wanted to do it. The concept of net neutrality is good, but what's unclear is whether it needs to be a law or if the marketplace will just manage to reach that state naturally, as happened in the 90s and 00s.

^Yep that's a poster that doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

Absolutely insane that people defend corporate activities designed to fuck them over.

We aren't talking about corporate activities in here. We're talking about the FCC possibly stepping back from their 2014 regulation enforcing net neutrality on landline ISPs. Guess what, when they do that, none of the doomsday predictions in this thread are going to happen and you will all be wrong. Just as a reminder, people in this thread predict and have posted that the FCC backing off from net neutrality will mean that ISPs start offering baskets of service for Facebook and Twitter only at current rates, and jack up standard service rates to twice what they charge now. It's not gonna happen, and that's what I'm pointing out.

If ISPs actually start doing what you guys predict, come back and argue for net neutrality then - people have been pushing for net neutrality as a law for decades, even though it was unnecessary at the time and advocates weren't able to really explain why they needed it to be enforced by the FCC.

I've read tech news including /. regularly for more than a decade and they have always been obsessed with net neutrality being made into a law (citing the bogeymen raised in this thread), I just still haven't seen any real reasons why it's that important.

People in here also seem to think net neutrality has something to do with data caps (multiple people have posted about them), which shows how much misinformation is being spread. The FCC doesn't stop landline data caps even right now under Obama.

 

[Arkeband]

Seth, I don't know how you can be an American citizen and proclaim ISP behavior is in any way Pro-consumer or in any way self regulating.

At every opportunity to raise standards for consumers, they have fought tooth and nail to slow progress. When the government gave them a giant handout to improve infrastructure they used none of it. They're spending millions in lobbying just to deprive people of being able to choose their own set top box. This is anti-consumer and it's anti free market. This is an industry that posts record profits year over year and enjoys local monopolies that no other industry enjoys.

We're moving toward a world where internet access is becoming necessary to live a meaningful and productive life. Your attempts to pooh-pooh the trajectory of an open internet in this very fast moving and pivotal point in technology is both misguided and naive.

 

[nintendoman58]

Google, EFF, Twitch, Youtube, Netflix, Hulu.

This shit isn't going to go down without a fight. More companies (especially tech ones) will be hurt from this than they will be helped, and they'll take action against it.

They can't just snap their fingers and declare it dead and be done with it without due process. Once it becomes more apparent that it's in danger the internet will take a stand against it like they always have.

Don't stop fighting. Donate to the right causes and spread the word.

 

[boiled goose]

We're so fucked.

Last time we only barely won because of silicon money money.

 

[Opto]

Google, EFF, Twitch, Youtube, Netflix, Hulu.

This shit isn't going to go down without a fight. More companies (especially tech ones) will be hurt from this than they will be helped, and they'll take action against it.

They can't just snap their fingers and declare it dead and be done with it without due process. Once it becomes more apparent that it's in danger the internet will take a stand against it like they always have.

Don't stop fighting. Donate to the right causes and spread the word.

Thing is that this administration is already to wear a lot of us thin. Trump puts his business interests ahead of us, delegates the rest to his neo-nazi cabal, then when we're busy fighting all fronts, he'll probably rape another 13 year old.

 

[JohnsonUT]

I am quite aware of the importance of internet in general. I'm also aware that net neutrality in the USA has only existed since 2014, after previous attempts by the FCC were repeatedly rebuffed by the courts. My internet worked fine before 2014 and it will work fine after Trump's FCC gets rid of net neutrality. Yes, there may be some arguments in favor of net neutrality, but the people in this thread acting as if the Internet is being shut down don't seem to understand that net neutrality as a law isn't actually that important to the Internet being useful or used.

This is both laughable and dangerous. Any sort of basic research will show that "net neutrality in the USA has only existed since 2014" is a flat out falsehood.

 

[Muppet of a Man]

Haha at this Seth guy trying to defend getting rid of Net Neutrality with the argument that "competition in the market will naturally lead to an approximation of Net Neutrality".

There is barely any noteworthy competition in the market. That IS the problem.

 

[atomsk]

If ISPs actually start doing what you guys predict, come back and argue for net neutrality then

So you're saying to wait for the fox to already be in the henhouse before doing anything.

Yeah I'm sure that'll work out well.

 

[boiled goose]

Haha at this Seth guy trying to defend getting rid of Net Neutrality with the argument that "competition in the market will naturally lead to an approximation of Net Neutrality".

There is barely any noteworthy competition in the market. That IS the problem.

Yup! If there was amazing isp competition things would be less bad, but even then there are philosophical reasons to support some parts of it. Content type gnostic but source agnostic for example.

Seth. People already HATE their isps. There is no free market.

 

[Mindlog]

And wow! Hey! What’s this thing suddenly coming towards me very fast? Very very fast. So big and flat and round, it needs a big wide sounding name like … ow … ound … round … ground! That’s it! That’s a good name – ground!

I wonder if it will be friends with me?

 

[Electric Eye]

This is why all forward thinking tech companies have had it with the old crusty isps and are looking for ways to bypass them with their own services from wireless to drones etc and if there is one positive about all this it's that this will accelate those plans. However, I fear that like in the past only metropolitan blue areas will benefit from these plans and the rural red states will be left to the old guard isp wolfs.

 

[undrtakr900]

Hopefully SV shuts down the Internet in protest and forces Trump and Co to back down.

What/Who is "SV"?

 

[Muppet of a Man]

Yup. After all, it's the minorities who have made their lives miserable - not old white men who've sold them the same lies over and over. No, can't be them, that would mean people who look like you don't always have your best interests at heart...

This is the easiest logic to understand as well, as they've been doing it out in the open for years now.

 

[undrtakr900]

I honestly think Trump had no idea/expected he was going to win and now he's in over his head(remember his face after they announced he won). Trump probably doesn't care one way or the other about net-neutrality, but the Replicans are going to just use him to get all thier Lobbyist-backed agenda passed. Goddamn he hasn't even been swore in yet and already I'm scared as fuck of the next 4 years...😬

 

[Deleted member 80556]

Google, EFF, Twitch, Youtube, Netflix, Hulu.

This shit isn't going to go down without a fight. More companies (especially tech ones) will be hurt from this than they will be helped, and they'll take action against it.

They can't just snap their fingers and declare it dead and be done with it without due process. Once it becomes more apparent that it's in danger the internet will take a stand against it like they always have.

Don't stop fighting. Donate to the right causes and spread the word.

I can only hope they invest a lot of fucking money on this, because this shit is terrible precedent for the entire world.

And yes, before you ask, fellow human from America, turns out organizations from other countries do look at your regressive politics and fuck people over in other countries!

 

[Frozenprince]

It sure was nice being able to watch shit on Netflix without being bottlenecked.

 

[Switch Back 9]

How will this affect other countries?

If these are American services (Netflix etc.) does that mean these changes will carry outward from the States?

 

[Brandson]

Bandwidth caps and throttling for all! Up next: content filtering, localized geographic blackouts, price increases, more proprietary hardware, forced bundles, and service contracts. Trump is truly traditional TV's wildest dream coming true.

 

[Gurgelhals]

How will this affect other countries?

If these are American services (Netflix etc.) does that mean these changes will carry outward from the States?

No effect afaik. Companies such as Netflix have presences at various internet exchange points around the globe (see here: https://openconnect.netflix.com/en/peering-locations/ ) from which local internet service providers can directly connect to / peer with Netflix's network.

Of course, it could be a problem if all their servers were located within the United States, but streaming content providers such as Netflix have, of course, an interest in keeping the routes between their servers and their customers as short as possible.