Obama says FCC should reclassify internet as a utility

[Sanford]

What is equally amazing is that some people still assume that the feds can't do anything that would actually help society. I have no love for big government, but there are some things that it does do well that helps the majority of society. Maybe it's the blind squirrel argument, but it does happen.

I do agree that there likely is something in this for government, but that does not automatically mean that it also wouldn't benefit the majority of us. The issue of net neutrality, which this is all about, is something that has the power to change how we interact with the internet.

I wont pretend that this would be a perfect solution, but i also wont pretend that monopolistic corporations have my best interests at heart

As soon as the feds become proficient at their constitutionally required functions such as, for instance, protecting the borders, I might begin to have a little confidence in their capability to do anything else efficiently.

While it's "neutral" today, it also smacks of "control" and you never know who or how they're going to define "neutral" tomorrow. I can easily envision a scenario where "neutral" becomes "it's an essential service so let's give it free to those who can't afford it by raising taxes on everyone else". Sort of like Obamaphones, for instance.

 

[Sanford]

They are spending enormous sums to maintain their monopolies and cut out any attempts by municipalities to offer Internet as a utility. Settle it once and for all and treat data communications as a utility.

Yeah, that works well ... "franchise fee" as another form of hidden taxation since they're already at the legal maximum.

 

[donner]

Hmm. A free and openly competitive market or regulation by political hacks who know more about what's good for me than I do. I'll take the open market, thank you very much.

sadly, though, it isn't an open market in most places

 

[farmerbyron]

I don't see the issue here. He's trying to prevent what has happened with cable TV. Cable started out good but it has evolved into total crap where a provider with what is essentially a monopoly tells you what to buy and how to buy it. Don't like the packages they sell - tough. Buy it or go elsewhere - except in many cases there isn't an elsewhere.
.

WTF are you talking about? If you have access to the sky, you have 2 viable cable options that are in heated competition with each other.

The main monopoly I would complain about is having to use OEC for electricity when I would rather use PSO. PSO was cheaper and more reliable. Govt regulation really working for me there.

Never underestimate govts ability to fukc something up.

 

[Hobbes]

Yeah but 7Mb wireless is a whole different animal than 50Mb cable internet.
You're not going to stream a blu-ray movie from Vuduu over wireless.
Completely different experience for most people.

Besides, without NN provision all the ISPs will be doing the same thing.
Throttling services unless they get paid, injecting ads into user browsing, blocking some websites all together.
No choice at all once that happens.

 

[Shadowrider]

Yeah but 7Mb wireless is a whole different animal than 50Mb cable internet.
You're not going to stream a blu-ray movie from Vuduu over wireless.
Completely different experience for most people.

Besides, without NN provision all the ISPs will be doing the same thing.
Throttling services unless they get paid, injecting ads into user browsing, blocking some websites all together.
No choice at all once that happens.

And what's wrong with it? The designed, constructed, equipped and operate their networks. So why should they have no control over it? See what I did there?

 

[Hobbes]

And what's wrong with it? The designed, constructed, equipped and operate their networks. So why should they have no control over it? See what I did there?

LOL, you are your own worst enemy.

I already paid for that internet service when I paid my bill.
That's what's wrong with it.

See what you are arguing for here?
You are arguing that the telecoms have the right to degrade your paid internet service for their own profit.

 

[Big_McLargehuge]

I don't like how our only options are either "telecom cartels" or "government control/make things easier for the NSA". We throw around "free open market" as if that's what we have now. The bottom line is, either choice the government wins. So let's not go with option A or B for once.

 

[Hobbes]

Why can't we just keep the same internet rules we have had for years?

I'll tell you why.

The telecoms sued in federal court and won.
The courts said as long as the FCC isn't regulating the ISPs as utilities they didn't have the authority to enforce the NN rules we have had until now.

Now, what does that tell you about what the telecoms are after?
They spent millions in the court system to sue for the right to throttle traffic and block websites because they expect to make billions off of selling access to it.

If you like the internet you've had so far you ad least need to recognize where the threat is coming from.
It's the big telecoms who pursued this in the court system for years and overturned existing law.

 

[Mike_60]

LOL, you are your own worst enemy.

I already paid for that internet service when I paid my bill.
That's what's wrong with it.

See what you are arguing for here?
You are arguing that the telecoms have the right to degrade your paid internet service for their own profit.

Actually, you very well may not have paid for your internet when you paid your bill, because a good deal of service is actually subsidized by other areas of business. For instance, historically business accounts tend to be more profitable and residential not so much. And all of Oklahoma isn't near as profitable as just the Dallas/Ft Worth area is. From what I've seen and heard I suspect all this talk about about regulating the internet is going to put a chill on network upgrades. After all, why should a company invest money in infrastructure when the FEDS might just waltz in and declare that it's under they're control. And decide what, if any, return you're gonna make on that investment.