Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #16087

Re: Net neutrality is dead

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 14:29:55 -0400
RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 14:49:25 -0500
> RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
> > Internet service providers say they will not block or throttle legal
> > content but that they may engage in paid prioritization. They say
> > consumers will see no change and argue that the largely unregulated
> > internet functioned well in the two decades before the 2015 order.
> > 
> 
> It's official:
> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/11/technology/net-neutrality-repeal.html
> 
> Net neutrality is dead in America.  Can't wait to see all the awesome
> innovation America's tech sector is now free to explore: bundled
> internet packages, premium websites, pay-to-play.  Let's do to the
> internet what we did to cable tv - that seemed to work pretty well,
> didn't it?*
> 
> 
> * if your definition of success is monetizing the slow, expensive death
> of a platform for short-term profit.
> 

Interesting piece from NYT:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/11/technology/how-net-neutrality-repeal.html

Today, the internet is run by giants. A handful of American tech
behemoths — Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google and Microsoft — control the
most important digital infrastructure, while a handful of broadband
companies — AT&T, Charter, Comcast and Verizon — control most of the
internet connections in the United States.

The very idea that large companies can’t dictate what happens online is
laughable now. Large companies, today, pretty much are the internet. In
this world, net neutrality didn’t have a chance.

So, what now?

There’s a misunderstanding that the repeal of net neutrality will
result in immediate and drastic change online. That won’t happen. With
lawsuits and legislation pending, with the media still paying attention
and with activists poised to pounce on obvious infractions, broadband
companies are going to be extremely careful, in the short run, to be on
their best behavior. The internet won’t be slower tomorrow. You won’t
be blocked from certain sites. You aren’t going to be charged more.

But as I argued last fall, a vibrant network doesn’t die all at once.
Instead it grows weaker over time, with innovative start-ups finding it
ever more difficult to fight entrenched incumbents.

As I’ve noted often in the last few years, big companies have been
crushing small ones over and over again for much of the last decade.
One lesson from everything that has happened online recently —
Facebook, the Russians and Cambridge Analytica; bots and misinformation
everywhere — is that, in the absence stringent rules and enforcement,
everything on the internet turns sour. Removing the last barriers to
unfair competition will only hasten that process.

It’s not going to be pretty.

“History shows us that companies that have the technical capacity to do
things, the business incentive to do them and the legal right — they
will take advantage of what is made available to them,” said Jessica
Rosenworcel, an F.C.C. commissioner and a Democrat, who voted against
the repeal of net neutrality last year.

By repealing neutrality rules, the government has just given our online
overlords that legal right, she cautioned.

“Now they can block websites and censor online content,” Ms.
Rosenworcel said. “That doesn’t make me feel good — and if you rely on
the internet to consume or create, it shouldn’t make you feel good,
either.”

Back to comp.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Net neutrality demise RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2017-11-21 17:29 -0500
  Re: Net neutrality demise RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2017-11-21 17:33 -0500
  Re: Net neutrality demise Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2017-11-21 22:57 +0000
    Re: Net neutrality demise The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2017-11-22 13:38 -0800
      Re: Net neutrality demise Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2017-11-22 21:59 +0000
        Re: Net neutrality demise RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2017-11-26 18:58 -0500
          Re: Net neutrality demise Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2017-11-27 02:12 +0000
            Re: Net neutrality demise Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2017-11-27 08:34 +0000
              Re: Net neutrality demise RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2017-11-27 15:52 -0500
                Re: Net neutrality demise Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2017-11-28 08:04 +0200
                Re: Net neutrality demise Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2017-11-28 08:35 +0000
          Re: Net neutrality demise Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2017-11-27 08:32 +0000
            Re: Net neutrality demise Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2017-11-28 02:13 -0400
              Re: Net neutrality demise Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2017-11-28 09:29 +0000
                Re: Net neutrality demise Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-11-28 10:29 +0000
                Re: Net neutrality demise Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2017-11-28 13:56 +0100
              Re: Net neutrality demise Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2017-11-28 11:01 +0000
      Re: Net neutrality demise Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon@gmail.com> - 2017-11-23 23:04 -0600
  Net neutrality is dead RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2017-12-14 14:49 -0500
    Re: Net neutrality is dead Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2017-12-14 21:57 +0000
      Re: Net neutrality is dead snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2017-12-14 22:23 +0000
        Re: Net neutrality is dead RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2017-12-15 01:00 +0000
        Re: Net neutrality is dead Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2017-12-15 16:19 +0100
        Re: Net neutrality is dead Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2017-12-15 18:18 +0200
          Re: Net neutrality is dead Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2017-12-16 01:55 -0400
      Re: Net neutrality is dead Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2017-12-16 21:24 +0000
        Re: Net neutrality is dead Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2017-12-17 10:15 +0000
          Re: Net neutrality is dead Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2017-12-17 14:54 +0100
            Re: Net neutrality is dead Peter Mc Donough <mcd-mail-lists@gmx.net> - 2017-12-17 18:27 +0100
              Re: Net neutrality is dead Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2017-12-20 10:19 +0100
                Re: Net neutrality is dead Peter Mc Donough <mcd-mail-lists@gmx.net> - 2017-12-23 14:57 +0100
          Re: Net neutrality is dead RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2017-12-18 00:12 +0000
            Re: Net neutrality is dead Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon@gmail.com> - 2017-12-17 19:25 -0600
          Re: Net neutrality is dead Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2017-12-20 02:02 +0000
            Re: Net neutrality is dead arnold@skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins) - 2017-12-20 19:18 +0000
              Re: Net neutrality is dead Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2017-12-23 03:50 +0000
    Re: Net neutrality is dead RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2018-06-11 14:29 -0400
      Re: Net neutrality is dead RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2018-06-12 12:34 -0400
        Re: Net neutrality is dead Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-06-18 12:05 +1000

csiph-web