Community Chat

[NoelSeven]

On 2/26/2015 mominohio said:

On 2/26/2015 NoelSeven said:

On 2/26/2015 NoelSeven said:

On 2/26/2015 SeaGal said:

On 2/26/2015 dooBdoo said:

On 2/26/2015 RainCityGirl said:

On 2/26/2015 dooBdoo said:

On 2/26/2015 RainCityGirl said:

On 2/26/2015 adelle38 said:

"Popular victories like today's are so unusual that three Congressional committees are investigating how this happened," said David Segal, executive director of Demand Progress, a group that supports net neutrality. He added in a statement, "If the net neutrality effort had followed the usual playbook, if Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T had defeated the American people, nobody would be wondering why."

Great s cr ew the people over once again by making their taxes pay for 3 congressional committees who don't like that the people scored a victory. That is exactly why nothing gets done in congress for the better of the citizens. The high rollers met with defeat. We just can't have that....that's what the lobbyists pay them for.

Great posts. All the time wasted "investigating" things that passed, simply to assuage bruised egos or to satisfy their coveted lobbyists, is enormous money down the drain and time gone that could've been used to help the country. It reminds me of frivolous lawsuits, and I wish the pols who do it could be heavily fined when their "investigations" find no wrong doing.

When no wrong doing is found, the jerks just launch an investigation of the investigation. I guess they think it they keep it up, eventually they will get the outcome they already have preconceived.

I agree. I wish voters would pay more attention to this. Actually, I wish more people would take the time to make themselves better informed by a myriad of sources, and more of the informed people would vote.

So doobdoo, are you saying because some dont agree with you (OR this discission) we are uninformed? Seriously?

Are you? I'd like to read your take on how small business is involved.

I'll wait a few minutes...

Nothing, huh? OK.

Instead of getting snarky, look back through the posts, this was answered.

Try discussing facts instead of wild-eyed claims about "government".

[NoelSeven]

On 2/26/2015 dooBdoo said:

In case it's helpful, here's some info I posted previously:

1 -- What You Need To Know About Tomorrow’s Votes On Net Neutrality And Municipal Broadband

"On Thursday morning, the Federal Communications Commission will sit down to discuss and vote on two big issues — net neutrality and municipal broadband — that the cable and telecom industries have campaigned heavily to defeat and obscure. Because of these industry-backed efforts and the legalese involved, many consumers are having difficulty separating myth from reality. In an effort to cut through that haze, we’ve attempted to answer the most pressing questions about these two topics before tomorrow’s vote... "

details: http://consumerist.com/2015/02/25/what-you-need-to-know-about-tomorrows-votes-on-net-neutrality-and-...

~~~~~~

2 -- A Guide to the Open Internet

"Network neutrality is the idea that your cellular, cable, or phone internet connection should treat all websites and services the same. Big companies like AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast want to treat them differently so they can charge you more depending on what you use.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is currently debating legislation to define limits for internet service providers (ISPs). The hope is that they will keep the internet open and prevent companies from discriminating against different kinds of websites and services..."

details: http://www.theopeninter.net/

~~~~~~

3 -- These 2 Charts From Comcast Show Why Net Neutrality Is Vital

"...Scaremongering opponents of neutrality claim it will hurt innovation or create government-run networks. But they gloss over the fact that neutrality rules existed for four years during which telecom and broadband companies spent an unprecedented amount of money developing new technologies.

And reclassification does not in any way turn broadband over to the government; nor will there be any new taxes because the Internet Tax Freedom Act bans state and local taxes on broadband access, regardless of the FCC’s classification of the service.

Net neutrality is about nothing more than keeping Comcast, Verizon and the rest of them from extorting money from consumers and content providers just because they control the Internet off-ramps."

details: http://consumerist.com/2015/02/24/these-2-charts-from-comcast-show-why-net-neutrality-is-vital/

You've provided good information over the past several days.

Unfortunately, those who need the information don't bother to read it.

[NoelSeven]

Good luck, OP, terrier and dBd

[60sgirl]

On 2/26/2015 NoelSeven said:

On 2/26/2015 mochachino said:

okay, trying to read information on this subject.

1. it was suggested we do our homework and read up on it, so of all the sites that talk about it both pro and con, how are we the average layperson supposed to decipher the gobblydgook and understand all the ramifications?

2. If George Soros is behind this in any way, shape or form, it is not a good thing, ever.

3. Can someone summarize for me if by definition of companies slowing down access speed to things like competitors or smaller websites, that means when I do a google search, only the companies that have the fastest datalinks load first and thereby others fall back so that I don't see them?

4. Based on my internet bill, why can some companies in my area charge $14.95 a month for cable, another one 29.95 and a third one as much as $65 a month depending on speed? Is the speed issue going to stay the same under the ruling, and if so, how does that help me, the consumer? Every year, I have to argue with AT&T to stop them from increasing my monthly bill, when they can recruit new customers for $25, why should a longstanding customer pay $65 for the same service? I negotiate my bills with the Office of the President every year via the complaint resolution to FCC and get my bill to stay the same but why should I have to spend that much time doing that.

I don't understand anything else even after reading.

NET NEUTRALITY is what we have now.

Without it, providers can charge users like you and me extra for using various sites. Netflix would most like be one of them.

Your provider will also be able to block your use of small business sites. Why? Because they can't pay the higher rates that big business can pay, and pay happily to be the only ones you can get to.

okay, so they voted to keep it the same then? Why did they need 332 pages to do that?

And so, if I understand you, if I own a small online business, my fees if you will, to obtain a license to have my website accessed on the internet would be substantially higher than say Zappos would because of their volume on the net? Don't all companies have to start small before they get huge? In the beginning of the WWW, anyone could buy a domain for less than $5.00, has all that changed?

I have more questions than answers because I can't understand all the technical stuff I have read so far.