When net neutrality dies is DSL still going to be the old "free" internet...

When net neutrality dies is DSL still going to be the old "free" internet? If I understand correctly ISPs can't throttle phone lines or alter packets because it's a public utility. Might be a little slower, but better than blocked sites and package plans. Will you switch to DSL to enjoy a net neutral internet?

Other urls found in this thread:

t-mobile.com/offer/binge-on-streaming-video.html
blog.streamingmedia.com/2014/02/netflixs-streaming-quality-based-business-decisions-isps-net-neutrality.html
techdirt.com/articles/20171122/09473038669/fcc-releases-net-neutrality-killing-order-hopes-youre-too-busy-cooking-turkey-to-read-it.shtml
blog.streamingmedia.com/2014/06/netflix-isp-newdata.html
reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/7etu6x/iama_guy_who_setup_a_lowlatency_rural_wireless/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Nah, i'll just enjoy my cable internet like i always have even before this NN meme

Until mid-2016, my town was still served by a Nokia #1A.
So...........I'll have to say no. Kept going over my data cap every single month

>like i always have
What's your trick for getting oldinternet though cable?

>Nokia #1A
Not sure what that is. Is it a public utility according to the FCC?

I think you're right. Since DSL goes over the phone, AT&T can't fuck with the data. If they could, they would have charged more for call quality or who you call by now.

>NN regulations never existed before 2015
Why the fuck are all you faggots freaking out?

>Thinks the medium is what matter
>What is TCP/IP

>but better than blocked sites
before net neutrality, at&t tried to block Sup Forums access
at&t was dsl based

I'm still on DSL.

Why do you think packets over a phone line is not different than packets over cable? How about you break it down and share some knowledge instead of just your smug greentext?

How did that work out for them? That's what unadulterated packets over a public utility is all about. Do you think something will change for phone lines once net neutrality for cable is done away with?

Not even him, but because this is the most basic of networking principles, and if you don't understand it I don't know why you're even on Sup Forums.

lol that face

The physical layer is irrelevant when it comes to filtering traffic.

P.S you need to leave

>being a public utility means ISPs can't do dumb shit
where did people get this idea?

phone companies have been doing the walled garden thing for ages, are you too young to remember ringtone stores? Until the 70s it was illegal to connect anything but a bell phone to the telephone network.
water utilities add toxic chemicals and fail to remove endocrine disruptors from the water supply
power companies are installing "smart meters" so that they can charge people more for the same power, and charge home users more per kW than industrial users

you're being manipulated

Phone lines, phone service and DSL are three different things. Phone service doesn't need to run over phone lines (cable providers provide phone service via their cable networks, some wealthier last mile companies have installed FTTH) but is regulated the same way in terms of circuits, power backups, etc. None of this has to do with being declared a "public utility".

if you're interested in a long explanation of why this "net neutrality" stuff is bullshit, check out erratasec's recent blog posts on the matter

Net neutrality doesn't apply to mobile internet (ie. t-mobile binge on zero rating). I think the medium makes a difference whether net neutrality applies or not.
t-mobile.com/offer/binge-on-streaming-video.html

AT&T never tried to actually block Sup Forums, they were preventing hosts on their network from participating in a DDoS attack against img.Sup Forums.org, saving both themselves and Sup Forums bandwidth costs for the duration of the attack

they would have done the same thing under net neutrality rules, unless the net neutrality rules are so retarded that people aren't even allowed to respond to malicious traffic.

blame shitty "news" media for misreporting on the issue

You're full of it. Phone company can't throttle phone lines.

The person you responded to just explained why you're wrong and yet you still keep going.

I'm a different person replying.

Holy shit, please get off of Sup Forums.

still applies, but net neutrality doesn't mean what people think it does. ISPs can take measures to maintain service, which can include installing CDNs or blocking certain applications (facetime)

the main issues people are talking about with net neutrality should be dealt with via antitrust legislation, not internet regulation. government is far more likely to censor your internet than an ISP

Somebody doesn't know how things work.

Nobody is talking about 3G/4G plans right now, but I will, because it's also irrelevant. Internet access is internet access.

An interesting read, but how will it work in areas where there is a monopoly? We don't have NN in New Zealand but that's because the lines are government owned not ISP owned. If one of our ISP's started to start releasing plans that allow cheaper access to certain websites (which they are, Vodafone NZ just announced plans pic related), luckily they are optional, if they were forced I would go to a competitor who won't dick me over. Whereas some people in America might not have that liberty.

Net Neutrality is a misnomer for you guys, it should be called Net Equality.

>If I understand correctly ISPs can't throttle phone lines or alter packets because it's a public utility

god that's a fucking novel idea. Thanks for the laugh op.

Are you actually retarded or just pretending?

Why are they talking about "public utilities" if the physical layer is "irrelevant"? When net neutrality ends phone lines are still a public utility. Net neutrality and the FCC has been about public utilities. The new ruling by the FCC is not going to reclassify phone lines as something different than a public utility. The whole deal with the FCC is that they can't mess with packets over a public utility.

I've only seen zero rating on mobile. I think it's illegal on household internet, but overturning net neutrality would make widespread.

It's only a public utility until it reaches their servers/routers/switches. Then they should be free to do whatever they like with your packets.

The FCC is treating packets as a public utility? The FCC currently classifies packets as a public utility?

>my internet was fine before NN
Except it wasn't for people who where using netflix on comcast. Comcast didn't take to kindly that Netflix was competing with there TV, so Comcast throttled Netflix to hell and demanded money to speed up service. This is the reason why NN was thought out to place ISPs as common carriers so that all internet traffic is treated equally. You people are just blind sided by the fact NN is actually a preventive measure to stop this behavior before it it would start getting out of control.

>their servers/routers
ISPs don't have additional servers that they run packets through. There is the originating server and my router that I own.

because phone lines are just wires which carry 3 or more different types of service, only one of which is a public utility.

net equality is stupid. you get what you pay for. the internet is not a big truck, it's a series of tubes

iirc they set up some "toll free app" thing as a workaround. whatever

Not servers, I was just making a point. At some time between your Router and the server you've requested data from, it has to pass through your ISP's hardware, be that a firewall, router of some kind, switches etc. It's here that your traffic can be shaped.
>net equality is stupid. you get what you pay for. the internet is not a big truck, it's a series of tubes
This is fuck you got mine mentality.

why not just apply existing FTC regulations to comcast instead of inventing new ones?

who's actually funding these new regulations and who stands to gain?

>This is fuck you got mine mentality.
not really, I'm not sure where you get that from. why should people who pay for different levels of connectivity be treated equally?

aside from that, some people are streaming multiple movies at a time, or even a whole book. can you believe that?

Fake news.
blog.streamingmedia.com/2014/02/netflixs-streaming-quality-based-business-decisions-isps-net-neutrality.html

Don't they block it on their cellular network?

It don't mater, DSL Cable, the line don't mean shit. It all ends up at the same originating source (ISP). There they can do whatever to it. But right now (I think) it's law that all content (Streaming/reg net traffic) must be capped to allow quality service at 10 meg speed. So it don't mater if you got 10 meg or 100 meg that 1080p netflix vid will still stream properly. It's only when on the customer end that you add several devices (trying to stream 3 Netflix 1080 vids+ torrent + game) that 10 meg just won't do it.

This is the incorrect reasoning for smart meters, smart meters, smart inverts, along with other on the line sensors will allow better voltage control. Right now power companies over send power way more than they should. With new tech they can fine tune, save more money while probably not charging less then before.

Seems like downloading data might be more predictable for management , ppl w great connections will get it with minimal delay.

I have AT&T Uverse (DSL). AT&T still has a bandwidth cap unless you pay more ($30 for unlimited)

but are signals even trackable on dsl

>"These decisions that Netflix and ISPs make determine how much transit, peering and other technical resources they deploy and what impact it has on their bottom line"

Holy shit this guy is a fucking moron. These companies can push nearly unlimited amounts of traffic through their systems. Netflix literally was blackmailed by Comcast to pay more you. What did the ISPs ever do for you that made you love them so much? You are some sort of cuck masochist I imagine. How else could you feel the way you do?

>These companies can push nearly unlimited amounts of traffic through their systems.
No they fucking can't. If they could, then why doesn't everyone get unlimited speeds you fucking idiot?
Netflix is NOT paying more to Comcast either. They are paying way less under the new agreement then they did before. Another example of an uninformed redditor reading fake news.

> Blog website
WOOP WOOP NIGGER ALERT
> BUT BUT NOT A MOLENUX
FUCK YOU NIGGER FAGGOT, NOONE IS GONNA TAKE A FAGGOT BLOGGER SITE SERIOUSLY EVER

Keep sucking that Netflix cock redditor.

I lobby to block Sup Forums and i like Sup Forums

Mike?

> Netflix
> not pirating your entertainment
ARE YOU LITERALLY, OBJECTIVELY, UNIRONICALLY, GAY NIGGER? DO YOU THINK I GIVE ONE FAGGOT FAGGOT ABOUT COCKFLIX.CUMINMYASSDADDY
ARE YO URETARDED
> WOW. HAHA UR GAY
> TTTRRRRIIGGGERRRED
YOU ARE LITERALLY JEWIASH-IRISH NIGGER WHO SPAMS NIGGER TIER ARGUMENTS ABOUT THROTTLING MY HOMOSEXUAL PORN, WHO'S THE GAY ONE HERE?

BTW, NOT SCREAMING. USING OLD KEYBOARD. GO AHEAD AND REPLY ON YOUR SMARTPHONE NIGGER

That's right, Jay.

l2read

techdirt.com/articles/20171122/09473038669/fcc-releases-net-neutrality-killing-order-hopes-youre-too-busy-cooking-turkey-to-read-it.shtml

Some of the existing issues are noted in the article.

Sup Forumsternet

Comcast overprovisioned lines. They said their customers could get packages at a certain speed.
Comcast assumed these customers would be using their packages 1% of the time.

Thanks to a movie streaming service, the customers are now using their packages 20% of the time. Comcast's network cannot keep up with this usage and still meet their customer's needs at the package levels they purchased.


Who is at fault?

Holy fuck how fucking retarded are you? Do you not possess basic reading comprehension? Comcast's network is perfectly fine. Netflix is using cheap, overprovisioned connections to get INTO Comcast's network, and then throws the blame on Comcast into order to pressure them into giving them a free connection. Fake news at it's best.

The ISP just like airlines are assholes for overbooking. The argument in their defense here seems to be they promised a service that has a proven history of massive changes in usage and should not be blamed because usage increased. Nice try. Other companies that fail to understand their market fail.

wut

>Netflix is using cheap, overprovisioned connections to get INTO Comcast's network,
source?
I'd accept it in the form of a traceroute.

>Netflix is using cheap, overprovisioned connections to get INTO Comcast's network
Streaming services are unicast. The Comcast customers are requesting data. There is no unwanted data being pushed into the Comcast network.

blog.streamingmedia.com/2014/06/netflix-isp-newdata.html

>internet fairies just magically deliver Netflix content to Comcast instantly, and Comcast is the one blocking it from coming in
Why do redditors never understand how the internet works?

more people will just band together to buy internet directly from the tier 1 supplier, bypassing entities like comcast altogether

like this guy
reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/7etu6x/iama_guy_who_setup_a_lowlatency_rural_wireless/

>gun regulations never existed before the 2nd
Why the fuck are all you faggots freaking out?

>trying to argue an idea without having the slightest idea of how networks and isps work

Why are you even arguing ?

This article seems to infer that the debate should be between Comcast (a customer service provider) and Level3, Limelite, akamai (the service provider for service providers).

Please do not use stock link replies, use your know-how.

You're the one who does not have the slightest idea how networks and ISPs work, because you just saw this on the front page of reddit and decided to shill it everywhere.

Netflix is manipulating the media in order to pressure ISPs to give them free peering because they are too cheap to go through the proper routes like everyone else. They deliberately sabotaged their customer's connections to do this.

>Netflix is manipulating the media
Since when does "the media" want anything to do with Netflix, their competition? What an odd conspiracy theory you're parroting.

>they are too cheap to go through the proper routes like everyone else
Sounds like they went with the free market solution. It was a cheaper option, they took the cheaper option.

>Since when does "the media" want anything to do with Netflix, their competition?
To get clicks, the same with everything else. Especially from dumb redditors who believe everything they read.

>Sounds like they went with the free market solution. It was a cheaper option, they took the cheaper option.
Yup, free market at work. No need for net neutrality.

Indeed, for Netflix, whether there is NN or not is not part of the debate.

So now let's establish what good things repealing net neutrality does.
Um.

>posting threads on reddit and claiming people are as autistic as him
Please keep posting, I don't even need to say anything you're making yourself look like a moron.

Allow new ISPs to enter markets without having to install convoluted meters everywhere to keep track of whether they are in compliance with a bunch of useless regulations.

i wish i was on DSL, i'm stuck on ADSL

you keep posting that, but i dont think you understand what you are saying

Oh sorry you seem to be misinformed. That's okay, it was expected.
Depending on local laws, which may have had lobbying from the big ISPs that are telling you repealing NN is a Good Thing, you can as easily establish an ISP as ever, given some medium funding in the order of about $3000 per month from a Tier 1 service provider, where you, and your small team, are free to operate a business providing an internet service for your community.

Repealing NN will not fix these local laws.

DSL is fine.

In fact, it's better than Comcast in this city.

I assume he's talking about a 1ESS switch

>t. brazillian mosquito baby

WHAT THE LITERAL HECK DID THEY MEAN BY THAT STICKER

ALSO PAJEET PAI IS THE BIGGEST COMPANYMAN ATTABOY TO EVER RUN THE FCC, WHICH IS SAYING SOMETHING

That's when they install the botnet.

Net Neutrality prevents the implementation and freedom for another company to go there. This should be able to change.

Net neutrality destroys competition, with competition ISPs are at war against eachother and have to improve, or jack down prices. This is the reality. This is the point that guy in the OP pic tried to make.

You know that DSL traffic and PSTN are different right? The fact that you throttle one type of traffic does not imply you throttle the other even if they are served from the same medium.
I know it's not the same concept, but as an analogy look at TCP/IP QoS

They can just block you from accessing IPs you retard.(if the reddit shitposters are true)

>meters everywhere
You mean routers?
Routers automatically measure the speed to neighbours, it is standard behavior to find the fastest route to a server.
You can change this so the speed to a specific site is slower but it doesn't happen by accident.
The problem people bitched about when the law was introduced was certain ISP's throttled the speed to a specific site (Netflix) in order to make people use their own alternative.
It was so bad it stuttered and you had to wait for the buffer. But then people tested with a VPN and there the speed to Netflix was faster.

You got that all wrong, buddy.

>with competition ISPs are at war against eachother and have to improve, or jack down prices
UMM SWEETIE, ISPS HAVE BEEN ON A NONSTOP MERGE SPREE, YOU HAVE TO SEE THIS PUSH FOR DEREGULATION IN CONTEXT OF THE INDUSTRY

CABLE ISPS ARE NOW A FUNCTIONAL DUOPOLY BETWEEN COMCAST AND CHARTER AFTER BOTH FIGHTING TO BUY TWC, YOU THINK NOW THEY'RE GOING TO COMPETE AND NOT COLLUDE?

IF YOU WANT TO OFFSET YOUR INCOMING ASSRAPE JUST BUY SHARES IN BOTH COMPANIES

Same,its fine for shitposting; browsing and 720p YouTube's which is all I care about now.

>with competition ISPs are at war against eachother and have to improve, or jack down prices
Not in America, they just buy each other out until there's one giga monopoly.

>charge home users more per kW than industrial users
The fact that you haven't put even a cursory thought into why power utilities industry less shows that your entire post is probably similarly ignorant. There are several reasons that industry gets charged less and the three key ones are
1) you get a better price when you buy in bulk (this one is obvious and you're an asshole for not figuring it out yourself)
2) industry customers often have to supply their own transformation equipment
3) industry brings a lot of good jobs to an area, so giving industry cheap energy is a great stimulus to the economy

With power utilities, this is the same everywhere you go. It's not because of corruption or underhandedness, as you suggest. You just have no idea what you're talking about.

how can one's brain be so saturated with nonsensical bullshit

America has a serious education problem

na the only dsl I can get is century link and they are fucking terrible service provider.

THE WAY CABLE WORKS IS EXCLUSIVE TERRITORIES, THEY HAVE ABSOLUTELY ZERO FREEMARKET INCENTIVE TO COMPETE WITH EACHOTHER ON PRICE OR SERVICE BECAUSE THE CUSTOMER HAS NO REAL BROADBAND ALTERNATIVE OTHERWISE

ITS THE SWEETEST DEAL A COMPANY COULD EVER GET, THATS WHY THEY'RE WILLING TO PAY OUT THE ASS TO BUY UP AS MUCH OF THE COUNTRY AS THEY CAN OR AS MUCH AS THE DOJ WILL ALLOW, CABLE ISP IS A TOTAL CASHCOW

You know, I really am open to the idea that NN may not be the best move, but I have yet to see a single compelling argument for why that might be the case...

>do you REALLY want more government regulation!?
ISPs are already under government regulation. NN is a RECLASSIFICATION to a different set of regulations. It is NOT more regulations, it is in fact LESS regulation overall. The move to Title II would exempt ISPs from a current 17% tax, for example.

Ultimately, the number one objective of reclassifying ISPs is to reduce their power over other entities that wish to do business on the internet. Good internet access is integral to operating a competitive business in the 21st century. Given that, why would we allow a service provider to have the power to decide whether your business succeeds or fails?

Yes, there are other problems, but NN is an immediate solution whereas other solutions may never materialize.

>better than blocked sites and package plans

First of all, there is no indication that ISPs want to do this. Second, you can still do this with DSL.

>Comcast blocks competing content
Comcast already got in trouble for doing literally this
>Comcast doesn't offer package plans
Doing that is the majority of their cable tv and phone business. Of course they want to turn the internet into tv channels.

LMAO holy fucking 10 days.

I have DSL and it's total shit and they throttle the hell out of it. They do probably breach common carrier laws but they face no recourse and never will.

>before net neutrality, at&t tried to block Sup Forums access
>at&t was dsl based

No, it still is, and no, it wasn't DSL. It was U-verse customers only - based on Cable.

>shit that didn't happen
kys shill