myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
NET NEUTRALITY
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 7449
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 10:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sure...when the GOVT auctions spectrum, it includes rural areas that carriers would NOT wire if they didnt have to. Many billions of dollars of unprofitable spectrum are included in the auctions. In regards to ARPA and the 30 year defense department development of the internet, it surely adds up to many many billions...On its surface, I agree with your argument, and the agreements are already being forged betweeen carriers and high volume utilizers like Netflix...However , if pushed to choose, I would argue that some regulation is needed, or we might end up with the two or three lame carriers dicatating pricing for streaming internet services...which would KILL Silicon Valley.
To add...I believe in regulation. If the US just put one small regulation in the books in the early 2000's, we would have avoided the entire financial crash...just implement a 20% down rule on all home purchases..thats all. Thats the way I look at Net Neutrality.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 7449
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 11:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Given eve rything I said above, I just heard Marc Cuban's argument, and I might change my mind Rolling Eyes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MalibuGuru



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 8570

PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 11:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

boggsman1 wrote:
Given eve rything I said above, I just heard Marc Cuban's argument, and I might change my mind Rolling Eyes


All bytes are equal! Internet is now a public utility. Can't wait for the great service to begin.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 4570

PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 11:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think that the government "investment" in the internet argument withstands scrutiny. All the serious advances of the last two or three decades have come from private innovation and investment. The companies that had the foresight to make those investments are entitled to reap the rewards. As for your two or three lame carriers, there are antitrust laws already on the books to prevent an abuse of monopoly pricing. I think a better analogy than your housing market example is private funding of a toll road. The builder collects tolls from those who are prepared to pay to get to their destination faster. The government stepping in to insist that everyone should have the same access to that toll road, even if they can't afford the tolls, hardly seems fair does it? The cost of form filling and bureaucrats would simply make the whole proposition less efficient. It pains me to disagree with you, but, right now, I'm giving this one a thumbs down.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 7449
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 11:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thats fair... although a lot of the toll road has been funded by the US GOVT. My point is that the GOVT is doing what it has a right to do, provide a market for fair competition. In rural areas around the country, there is usually 1 choice for broadband , and the rates of increase are ridiculous. My fear is that many businesses wont launch if the cost to operate on the web increases...a net negative. The other unintended outcome is that no Net Neutrality would open the door for ala carte pricing, which would kill the cable companies.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MalibuGuru



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 8570

PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 11:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The even bigger issue is that the fcc could institute morals standards, because TV and internet are essentially the same thing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 7449
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 11:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MalibuGuru wrote:
The even bigger issue is that the fcc could institute morals standards, because TV and internet are essentially the same thing.

which rightys would love. It was the threats from righty groups which launched "Nipplegate"...took the FCC 8 years to rule, and ultimately dismiss the fine.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 4570

PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 11:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My place in the Alleghenies has slow internet speeds. Painful at times. That's a choice I made so I feel no entitlement to speeds enjoyed by people who choose to pay a million dollars for a shoebox in NYC. Rather, a group of us homeowners are now looking for a group solution, or at least, improvement. If the price charged by that one rural ISP becomes high enough, or the service becomes unacceptable, others will move in or innovative people will find alternatives. That's the beauty of the free market. Government will add cost, not innovation.

Just saw your comment on "Nipplegate". The 8 year grind to a conclusion on that trivial matter merely reinforces objections to FCC intervention on much more weighty matters.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 19249

PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 12:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My concern about neutrality is that it may be the Trojan Horse this administration has threatened for many years: control over political content on the internet. We've already seen political activists curtail conservative TR dramatically largely by threatening sponsors, and the Obama administration all but owns most "news" media; if the internet follows suit we're looking at a one-party monopoly political system, followed by even further decline as a world power, followed in turn by our defeat.

Didja know that ISIS alone, not even counting the rest of radical Islam, already owns and controls more land then does the United Kingdom, on which the sun never set even within my lifetime?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 12980
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2015 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I scare myself, and I don't mean lightly...

Dan Hicks. He must have seen these guys coming.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 2 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group