net neutrality is now dead

[space otter]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/the-repeal-of-net-neutrality-is-official-here%E2%80%99s-how-that-could-affect-you/ar-AAyuvfb

The New York Times
The Repeal of Net Neutrality Is Official. Here's How That Could Affect You.
By KEITH COLLINS  10 hrs ago

It's official. The Federal Communications Commission's repeal of net neutrality rules, which had required internet service providers to offer equal access to all web content, took effect on Monday.

The rules, enacted by the administration of President Barack Obama in 2015, prohibited internet providers from charging more for certain content or from giving preferential treatment to certain websites.

After the commission voted to repeal the rules in December, it faced a public outcry, legal challenges from state attorneys general and public interest groups, and a push by Democratic lawmakers to overturn the decision. The opponents argued that the repeal would open the door for service providers to censor content online or charge additional fees for better service — something that could hurt small companies — and several states have taken steps to impose the rules on a local level.

Still, the repeal was a big win for Ajit Pai, the F.C.C.'s chairman, who has long opposed the regulations, saying they impeded innovation. He once said they were based on "hypothetical harms and hysterical prophecies of doom."

These are the rules that were repealed

The original rules laid out a regulatory plan that addressed a rapidly changing internet. Under those regulations, broadband service was considered a utility under Title II of the Communications Act, giving the F.C.C. broad power over internet providers. The rules prohibited these practices:

BLOCKING Internet service providers could not discriminate against any lawful content by blocking websites or apps.

THROTTLING Service providers could not slow the transmission of data because of the nature of the content, as long as it was legal.

PAID PRIORITIZATION Service providers could not create an internet fast lane for companies and consumers who paid premiums, and a slow lane for those who didn't.

What's everyone worried about?

Many consumer advocates argued that once the rules were scrapped, broadband providers would begin selling the internet in bundles, not unlike cable television packages. Want access to Facebook and Twitter? Under a bundling system, getting on those sites could require paying for a premium social media package.

Another major concern is that consumers could suffer from pay-to-play deals. Without rules prohibiting paid prioritization, a fast lane could be occupied by big internet and media companies, as well as affluent households, while everyone else would be left on the slow lane.

Some small-business owners are worried, too, that industry giants could pay to get an edge and leave them on an unfair playing field.

E-commerce start-ups have feared that they could end up on the losing end of paid prioritization, with their websites and services loading more slowly than those run by internet behemoths. Remote workers of all kinds, including freelancers and franchisees in the so-called gig economy, could similarly face higher costs to do their jobs from home.

Why it may not matter to you

Several states have taken measures to ensure the rules stay in effect. For example, in March, Gov. Jay Inslee of Washington, a Democrat, signed a law that effectively replaced the federal rules. Others, including the governors of Montana and New York, used executive orders to force net neutrality.

As of late May, 29 state legislatures had introduced bills meant to ensure net neutrality, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Still, several of these measures have failed, some are still pending, and not every state has taken such actions.

The argument against regulation

The F.C.C. said it had repealed the rules because they restrained broadband providers like Verizon and Comcast from experimenting with new business models and investing in new technology. Its chairman has long argued against the rules, pointing out that before they were put into effect in 2015, service providers had not engaged in any of the practices the rules prohibited.

"America's internet economy became the envy of the world thanks to a market-based approach that began in the mid-1990s," Mr. Pai said in a speech at the Mobile World Congress in February.

"The United States is simply making a shift from pre-emptive regulation, which foolishly presumes that every last wireless company is an anti-competitive monopolist, to targeted enforcement based on actual market failure or anti-competitive conduct," he said.

Several internet providers made public pledges that they would not block or throttle sites once the rules were repealed. The companies argued that Title II gave the F.C.C. too much control over their business, and that the regulations made it hard to expand their networks.

The internet was already changed

Perhaps the repeal won't change the direction of the internet. In November, Farhad Manjoo argued in his New York Times column that the internet had already been dying a slow death, and that the repeal of net neutrality rules would only hasten its demise.

He wrote that the biggest American internet companies — Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google and Microsoft — controlled much of the online infrastructure, from app stores to operating systems to cloud storage to nearly all of the online ad business.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-internet/u-s-net-neutrality-rules-expire-court-battle-looms-idUSKBN1J72C5
JUNE 11, 2018 / 2:38 PM / UPDATED 2 HOURS AGO
U.S. net neutrality rules expire, court battle looms
David Shepardson
5 MIN READ



https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/11/17439456/net-neutrality-dead-ajit-pai-fcc-internet
Net neutrality is dead — what now?
89
A field guide to Ajit Pai's internet
By Makena Kelly  Jun 11, 2018, 11:36am EDT


https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/06/bleak-future-internet-without-net-neutrality-and-what-you-can-do-stop-it
What to Watch for in an Internet Without Net Neutrality (And How To Stop It)
BY KIT WALSHJUNE 11, 2018

[zorgon]

This is good news

COX already has the internet that I use in a bundle  always has had..  And my server Globat is still one of the cheapest around.  Providers will still be offering deals to get the public

As for censorship Hell google, youtube facebook etc have been doing this for YEARS  Google removed ALL porn searches for their search engine  Problem with that is that the keywords for porn searches are also used in regular searches  like White House for example whitehouse.com used to be a porn site (I see it isn't now )

Fact is Facebook has been blocking content for a long time  They also block who sees your posts.

And people do tend to forget that private companies like FB and Google really are not obligated to give you free speech... says so in the T&C no one ever reads...

So I do not see any gloom and doom or even noticeable change for most people

[ArMaP]

This is good news

Why?

COX already has the internet that I use in a bundle  always has had..  And my server Globat is still one of the cheapest around.  Providers will still be offering deals to get the public

I think the fear is that they will make a bigger difference between those that pay less and those that pay more, so a cheap plan for a server will give you only cheap conditions, like low bandwidth or limited storage.

As for censorship

I didn't see any reference to censorship in the text.

Hell google, youtube facebook etc have been doing this for YEARS  Google removed ALL porn searches for their search engine

They did? Does that mean nobody can search for porn now?

[zorgon]

BLOCKING Internet service providers could not discriminate against any lawful content by blocking websites or apps.

[/size]

If your service provider blocks content, would you not go find one that doesn't? So the ones that block content will soon be out of business. This is self regulating

THROTTLING Service providers could not slow the transmission of data because of the nature of the content, as long as it was legal.

Our server Globat, when they switched us from a dedicated server to a shared sever several years ago already had issues with certain content slowing down the transfer speed Videos were at the top of the list followed my music then large files.   Since I move all such files to Media Fire we have had no further issues  Globat charges 4.44 a month for the first two years then its up to 9.99  For that you get UNLIMITED bandwidth and traffic and several 100 free programs like Gallery SMF forum and Wordpress  No provider is going to cut service  They will loose business very fast


PAID PRIORITIZATION Service providers could not create an internet fast lane for companies and consumers who paid premiums, and a slow lane for those who didn't.

This is another non issue. I have been using COX cable for internet for years ever since Century link stopped providing hard wire access in our area. They have ALWAYS has basic service and you pay extra for premium and ultra high speed connection. This is nothing new... its been going on for years despite that useless regulation. This too is self regulating  as you will pick the provider that suits your needs and price range.

However on the PLUS side... this will allow other providers to compete  Right now my only choice is COX  or go wireless which is a hell of a lot more expensive. So I pay 84.00 a month for ultra high speed connection and a basic land line phone

What's everyone worried about?

"Much Ado About Nothing" ~ Sir Francis Bacon (aka Shakespeare)

[zorgon]

I didn't see any reference to censorship in the text.

What part of 'blocking certain content' is not censorship? 


They did? Does that mean nobody can search for porn now? 

NO I did NOT say they BLOCKED CONTENT  I said they stopped it showing up in searches UNLESS you ask for it  I keep forgetting I need to be ultra literal with you

In the past you did a search for ANYTHING there would be a lot of random porn show up... That no longer happens

Google adjusts image search, won't show porn unless you ask for it (update)

https://www.theverge.com/2012/12/12/3759530/google-image-search-blocking

[ArMaP]

However on the PLUS side... this will allow other providers to compete  Right now my only choice is COX  or go wireless which is a hell of a lot more expensive.

The problem I see is that small ISPs use large ISPs' infrastructures, so those smaller ISPs are the ones that may be targeted by the large ones.

[ArMaP]

What part of 'blocking certain content' is not censorship? 

Oh, that. I agree, that's censorship.

NO I did NOT say they BLOCKED CONTENT  I said they stopped it showing up in searches UNLESS you ask for it  I keep forgetting I need to be ultra literal with you

You said Google "removed ALL porn searches", that's different.

And yes, you need to be literal with me.