Net Neutrality

Do you think the FCC Chairman knows what he's doing regarding Net Neutrality? Do you like buffering?

Other urls found in this thread:

cmcsa.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=1023210
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

He knows exactly what he is doing

Nothing will change at all, but stay scared retards

>"user, your used all of your 100MB data plan for "Sup Forums.org", we automatically recharged your data for $20, have a nice day"

As a previous Associate General Counsel to Verizon, there's no doubt he "knows what he's doing".

He's going to make Verizon millions.

Data caps are already legal

Nothing Obama did made them illegal

No, I don't believe he does.

He is a capitalist idealist, I really doubt anything will shake his fundamental belief that the free market will solve all our problems.
ISPs could take all the tax breaks, provider shit service still and he will either say that 1) Everything he did worked or 2) There are still too many regulations

Hold on are there really data caps for normal household broadband internet in america?

Ajit Pai does not understand anything, because he is the living definition of a Chinese Room. A homunculus birthed out of a corporate personage.

Yes really.

This is what happens when media companies are also your ISP.

There is a vested interest in making sure cord-cutting is as painful as possible.

Even most poorfag plans provide way more data than that

Not on my provider, but in the cities yeah. Rurals usually dont, but we dont usually have Comcast or TimeWarner, we have local providers.

Strangely I have no mobile cap on verizon either

You fail to mention who the previous administrator worked for.

Check em
Also
/thead

Tell me pls, inform me.

impressive

A literal new who was President of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) and CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA).

*jew

>new

Our small city is 2 hours from Chicago and Comcast/att decided that caps work be a good idea for us.

Are you supposed to be referring to Michael Copps?
He was the COS to Fritz Hollings prior to his tenure. And he came out strongly against corporate consolidation.
What the actual fuck are you talking about?

Hello in China . In country we do not have net neutrality , but all popular websites run by Chinese government . Government give us the best sites but citizens cannot get other web sites from the west . We use VPN here for access , but now government make more restrict on it . In China website , have ads by government that consumer cannot pass. Company that make video pay to remove ad for the person watch video . Net neutrality stop government from this , but China website good so , not need . For America , net neutrality not important because do government do not this ?

Wheeler, you ignorant mong

I said those of us without big companies.

How small? My area pop is 400 deep in central applachia

Take a pic with timestamp of the outside

Here in german back in 2013 the Telekom, the biggest ISP, tried to introduce data caps but thankfully the EU court kindly told them to fuck off

At least they're good for something

Wow that sounds truly horrible and I feel sorry for everyone of you guys in China

It's sad that most people are unaware that the final goal of all of this going on right now is having a China-like censored internet

Do you still have the highest electric rates in Europe?

technically not, but fuck come on it's still high

My monthly electric bill would be $600. Egads.

Christ are you running a factory off your wall socket or what?

Is that an average price ? and does it include delivery/maintaince fees ?

In Ontario the price varies according to time use usage its nearly 7am to 5pm is the most expensive.
Plus there is a fee called a delivery fee as well, but its stupidly worded it should really be called maintance fee that pays for the upkeep of all the transmission lines and such.

Do you spend 300/month on electricity right now ?

Holy shit.

My electric rate is $0.06/kWh or 0.05Euro/kWh

I have a house, people live in it and like ac.
$180ish

>Denmark and Germany highest

Its all taxes isn't it? Gotta pay for those unwilling to work somehow.

I know germany has very high prices as a way to subsidize the solar/wind industry.
I feel like germans are willing to pay those prices as a way to get away from Nuclear which they don't have a good opinion of.

There aren't additional fees in terms of delivery or anything, also no varying prices depending on time

For example you pay €500 per year for 2000kw/h, where you save a bit if you use around 2000 per year and not beyond that

It depends, when I lived out in the boonies the internet was fucking awful and capped to hell but in the city it's great.

Well at least everyone has healthcare and won't be in debt for life if they break their leg

I knew it. Many US citizens despise taxes as such. We don't tend to believe in subsidizing business (even though our government constantly fucking does.)

If your business can't survive on its own, it should fail. WindSolar will never work. You guys have it fucking made with Nuclear -- Love it.

Captcha: frei :^)

They'll just get blown up by some sand niggers

I broke my knee 4 years ago. $500 deductible (for whole year) and insurance payed rest. I also received care with a 5m wait.

>netflix users use way more data than normal users
>ISPs want to charge more for nextflix instead of just raising the price for everyone
>this is somehow bad
Explain how is this good and why netflix users deserve internet welfare

And what's stopping the ISPs from just slowing down all streaming services except their own expensive one then?

Many ISPs already tried to do this

I see, so then Ontario would likely be very close when it comes to kWh costs then.

The amount that can be charged for actual electricity is regulated.
So then we then pay a seperate fee for the maintaince of the lines.
It is entirely possible that a person who used 0 kWh still has to pay the "delivery fee" because those lines need to be maintained just in case they decided to flip the light switch in the house or not.
People in rural areas get hit hard with the delivery fees since there are fewer people to spread the cost of the maintenance among.

its what the german people want.
>If your business can't survive on its own,
I could make the same point about businesses only being viable if they pay their employees min wage.

because it's already illegal under FTC antitrust regulations

They wouldn't if you chosen ones would stop funding the sand niggers, Shlomo.

If a business is only viable by paying minimum wage, then its employees are worth minimum wage (to the business). If employees refuse to work for such wage (their skill is better than min) then the business fails. Sounds good to me.

Business that CAN NOT survive, SHOULD NOT.

>I could make the same point about businesses only being viable if they pay their employees min wage.
Because that's how you retain quality employees

You think those multi billion ISPs don't have a cartel and lobby to circumvent that?

If you had anything to do with ISPs in the last 20 years, you know they are the evil of the internet and try to squeeze every penny out of you and exploit their power at any change given

>implying it's all hunky-dory if isps make (((strategic partnerships))) with some ridiculous social networking site and prefer them whether I think they should all die in a fire or not

>then the business fails. Sounds good to me.
You've perfectly illustrated the point that not every provision of service or goods should be constrained by the customs and morals of business, and don't even pretend that you're not talking morality here.

Google and Facebook are already exponentially worse. kys retard

There is hardly any extra cost incurred for extra bandwidth consumed.

It is absolutely moral. Independent agencies (business and people) are free to exchange (money and labor) provided they can reach a mutually beneficial agreement. If two such agents can not reach an agreement, it should not occur. The reason people make more than minimum is a marketable skill (Programming, engineer) that is worth more money than say flipping burgers, which a robot could do for free.

Doctors make good money, because a business is willing to pay more for their skill, and the consumer is willing to pay the business for the provision of skill.

No good or service is mandatory which cannot be produced. If a good or service is truly mandatory, workers consumers and business will freely work together to provide it.

Then Netflix can pick up the bill and kit me since I don't even use that shit

As a network engineer, I disagree. Most of our edge carrier grade routers consume 2 to 5 more times more power under load then idle. They're never truly idle, but when a surge of network use occurs, we geniunely use more power in a noticeable amount.

Then why didn't the African slaves muh freely band together and produce muh truly mandatory services, corporatist evangelitard?
Ayncraps need to be physically removed.

and thats just power. Fiber is crazy expensive (50000/mile) and having to lay more lines because more customers use more has to be paid for somehow.

They did. heard of Haiti? In america, a non market force prevented that: violence.

>ost of our edge carrier grade routers consume 2 to 5 more times more power under load then idle
Electricity is cheap.

The point is the ISP provides you a service. How you use that service shouldn't affect your bill.

They are paid for with higher prices on faster speeds.
You want those gigabit speeds, you need to pay more for that.

I “like” how the whole public story of net neutrality is centered on clients' disadvantages, and no one digs deeper to learn there's a second side to this that is concerned with regulatory effects on ISP peering market.

Also, you burgers would benefit a thousand times more from anti-trust regulations against your monopolies and their lobbying of acts that prevent small scale ISPs from forming.

Yeah, for one router. Now how about or small datacenter which can fluctuate between 20kW and 100kW easily. and thats a small one.

i might concede the second one. But 100 people with 5Mbps can be 0-500Mbps, depending on what theyre doing. As such theyre actual cost can vary wildly. and if a service comes along that they all use driving to the top (500) we will increase their cost, since we now have to build more lines to accommadate.

hell no , he is a face a facade.
no one will ever know the true existent of what has ben wrote this day.
other than infamy.

>implying that corporations do not engage in violence, directly or indirectly, when they protect their assertions of exclusivity over muh market property
>implying that mercenaries do not exist
Argue from first principles why muh commies should be physically removed but not ayncraps, against the informed will of the people.

Rabid animals have to be taken down before they can be killed.

>buying intel
>not knowing about erlangs, the unit

>erlangs
Im not bringing those up in casual Sup Forums conversation. Not that its some crazy difficult concept, but its mildy difficult to type out explain that we have only actually 300 mbps capacity for 500mbps sales because not everyone will use simultaneous.

But it will effect my bill the moment I'm forced to subsidize services I don't even use aka Netflix. Fuck off

>costing jumps from $2.4/hour to $12/hour
Seriously, electricity is cheap like I said
Even if the place was running at full tilt 24/7 it would only cost ~9K/month

Now how many people does that data center service ? How much are they each paying on average ?

Companies like comcast make money over fist on this shit, lets stop pretend like they are poor as dirt, doing *us* a favor offering high speed internet.

what you are arguing is pay per usage (megabytes)
What we are talking about is making sure all packets that get routed through your ISPs network get treated equally.
Instead of your ISP picking the choosing winners, it should be the consumers that get to decide.

about 11k
that doesnt include a/c
or lighting

do you run a business? I don't have exact numbers, but that small out probably runs 150-200 thou a year in JUST ELECTRICITY. There are so many factors. Profit margin is fucking thinner than you think.

BTW, if you want to look into that, you should learn financial basics of providing (selling upstream connectivity vs. exchanging client cones in peering, etc.) and search for well-written posts about peering wars of the past. The roots of net neutrality quarrel are business interests of market actors. The Content wants to turn its popularity (number of Netflix viewers) into money (lower traffic prices, no prices, or even payments for free pering with Netflix), the Tube wants to turn its popularity (number of clients) into money (viewers can leave for a different service if Netflix lags often, which happens quite naturally in a busy network if you don't take measures to prioritize streaming video), they clash.

Did you think Google cares about your poor ass getting unequal service?

Stop whining about Netflix. They paid their ISP. Do your job or finally agree that the Internet should be a public good without private interests.

>Profit margin is fucking thinner than you think
we can look up earnings from Comcast easily

For q1 2017 they had 25.13M broadband subs
Their revenue for that segment was 3.6B

Of course that doesn't take into account the many people that have some triple play bundle and pay money for those other features as well.

Comcast's 2.6B profit for that quarter doesn't scream razor thing margins..

Isn't it fun when comcast employees larp as the small ISP engineers they're trying to drive out of business?

You just hate him because you're a racist.

comcast has a fiduciary duty to make as much profit as possible within the regulations the government places on them.
Logically, it follows that if they have a certain margin they must maintain it. The leadership will literally be replaced if they don't do everything in their power to do this. Such is the pain of capitalism. Many gains are made, but the ever increasing expectations of shareholders push companies into arguably unethical practices.

In short, FUCK comcast.

$103/sub in revenue? or Profit? Your numbers are jumbled.

Not joking: please advise.

>tfw live in Denmark

It was an example, I don't even know what Netflix wants this time, as I don't follow the case. My point is that “muh freedumz” rhetoric is just a smoke screen for someone's private interests, and I am amazed how all participants keep silence about the real deal.

cmcsa.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=1023210
its in revenue.

What is hard to seperate is people who say have both TV and internet with comcast, because not everyone will have both, so who knows how much overlap there is, but looking at their TV subs, its is very close to the number of internet subs they have, so likely the overlap is 90% or more.


the profit amount is for Comcast as a whole though.

3.6B revenue. Okay. Last year the rev was 80.4B, net profit 8.69B

So their margin is about 10%

So at 3.6B rev for broadband, thats about 140/sub in revenue. 10% is 14. So they make $14 a sub.

Seems pretty reasonable to me.

Pai Ajit just wants to please his Verishit overlords for that Verishit bucks to pad his street shitting ways

Look at their marginal costs as well.

They increased their internet subs by 429,000 and their revenue went up 10% (3,275B to 3,606B ) 331 million.

331m / 429K = $771 per new sub in revenue.

In a way the ISP is like a gym, after you cover your fixed costs , every new member/sub is almost pure profit.
Which is what we see here going on, Comcast is making a healthy amount of money already.

Well, this much is true, but politics is about lying to get people to do what you want, so I'm not particularly surprised about it.

All the more reason to nationalize the industry if they don't want to shut up and deliver what we pay them for.

It's not up to you to decide which businesses are making enough money.

Except without net neutrality, your data usage on different websites can count for different amounts toward you data cap (all the way down to zero for some sites). Facebook could pay off ISPs to zero rate data related to Facebook while ISPs could make data related to Sup Forums or other sites/services they don't like cost their customers twice as much.

Are you OK with lying, or being lied to? Either way, you come out as immoral person.

I'm not okay with it, actually. I maintain a seething rage underneath my jaded exterior which, I hope, is shared by my compatriots and fellows, user or no, and which, I hope, will unleash itself one glorious day in a frenzy of synchronized beheading and socialist expropriation.

In a democracy, it actually somewhat is up to you and your representatives.

Decisions if they make too much money for too little service because they are just too monopolistic or even if they can continue to exist at all are really basically a voters choice.

>In a democracy, it actually somewhat is up to you and your representatives.
>le representative democracy really isn't an aristocracy meme

Yes

Telecoms refuse to invest in infrastructure because they can't double dip on profits from them.
They paid him off saying they can't build infrastructure because of current regulation.
He is removing regulation so they can double dip and invest in infrastructure again.

One of the issues that I have noticed about this debate is that the people who are "pro net-neutrality" are not really pro net-neutrality at all, and only care about fucking over comcast or time warner. They do not really know what they are fighting for, but are very dedicated to the pro net-neutrality side because of their disdain for their ISP. They completely ignore the fact that by classifying the web as a telecommunications service, they are giving the FCC unprecedented control over the internet under their guidelines.

>does have any sense of how the real world 99% of people live in works or have any technical understanding whatsoever of the thing they're in charge of
the answer is ALWAYS a resounding NO

you're wrong. streaming video and VOIP services should be allowed priority for quality purposes.

Not on a per-site basis, have fun getting your speed to non-affiliated websites slowed to 16kb/s.

and before someone pipes in with some Comcast bullshit, there are many rural areas that rely on mobile and don't have the bandwidth anywhere close to that. enforcing net neutrality on those networks is handicapping their potential

already illegal retard. anyone with 2 brain cells can circumvent too

>this is about Republican vs. Democrat
stay cucked, dumb fuck

>enforcing net neutrality on those networks is handicapping their potential
net neutrality can co-exist with QoS packet prioritization, user. Learn the fucking difference already.

learn what the FTC is responsible for before you believe any of this hyperbolic bullshit

yeah, but our government is pro-monopoly, there's no chance of regulation happening unless it states more taxpayer money goes into some CEO's pocket.

Remember when this was just a meme?
wetriedtowarnyoubutyouwouldntlisten.json