Neat Net Neutrality News

[Grey Fox]

There are no options for consumers. It's all Verizon and Comcast controlled.

[HVC]

There are no options for consumers. It's all Verizon and Comcast controlled.

even the smaller competitors use the big guys infrastructure. It'd be easy enough to ramp down their speeds without net neutrality.

[KRonn]

That would be a valid point if we were seeing increasing monopolization versus decreasing.  There are more options for consumers now than ever before, and options will only increase as technology matures.  Regulating dinosaur speed is only going to make them less competitive with the mammals.

I guess my point is that regulation shouldn't be undertaken just because it can be.  Sure, it may be necessary, but the default assumption should be against government interference unless it can be shown to be necessary, rather than in favor of it unless it can be shown to be unnecessary.

The bureaucracy must expand to meet the continuing demands of the bureaucracy... 

[grumbler]

There are no options for consumers. It's all Verizon and Comcast controlled.

That's the result of regulation. And now you want more regulation.  Good luck with that.

[viper37]

There are no options for consumers. It's all Verizon and Comcast controlled.

even the smaller competitors use the big guys infrastructure. It'd be easy enough to ramp down their speeds without net neutrality.

wich was happening in Canada, with Bell, a few years ago.

[KRonn]

There are no options for consumers. It's all Verizon and Comcast controlled.

That's the result of regulation. And now you want more regulation.  Good luck with that.

There are over 300 pages of regulations that have been kept secret. Have those details been released yet?

FCC commissioner Wheeler was supposed to testify to Congress the day before the vote on the new regs, but he refused.
I don't know if these regs we know about are good or bad ideas, but I don't think I like the secrecy behind some of this. They've released some parts that appeal to people but what are the rest of the regs?

[dps]

Then again, there is also an argument that addressing a problem before it has a chance to become entrenched, distort the market and lead to serious consequences for its actors (both content providers and consumers) is better.

Yes, that's the argument I mentioned in my post.

It's not like monopolisation patterns are something that cannot be predicted by the economic theory - they work pretty much the same way in every "access to network" monopoly/oligopoly.

That would be a valid point if we were seeing increasing monopolization versus decreasing.  There are more options for consumers now than ever before, and options will only increase as technology matures.  Regulating dinosaur speed is only going to make them less competitive with the mammals.

I guess my point is that regulation shouldn't be undertaken just because it can be.  Sure, it may be necessary, but the default assumption should be against government interference unless it can be shown to be necessary, rather than in favor of it unless it can be shown to be unnecessary.

The Europeans tend not to understand that.

EDIT:  Heck, we're bad enough about it ourselves.

[Grey Fox]

There are no options for consumers. It's all Verizon and Comcast controlled.

That's the result of regulation. And now you want more regulation.  Good luck with that.

Well, yes. Only regulation can stop them from destroying the dream.

[grumbler]

There are no options for consumers. It's all Verizon and Comcast controlled.

That's the result of regulation. And now you want more regulation.  Good luck with that.

Well, yes. Only regulation can stop them from destroying the dream.

The dream of having no choice?  That's a dream worth destroying.

[Grey Fox]

You already have no choice, I don't see how letting them also dictate which websites you can visit is giving you MORE choice.

[grumbler]

You already have no choice, I don't see how letting them also dictate which websites you can visit is giving you MORE choice.

I have choice.  We're talking about you, here.  What company dictates which websites you can visit, and how do they let you know?

[Grey Fox]

You don't. Myself, no company is, Canada has strong net neutrality regulation.

[Siege]

You already have no choice, I don't see how letting them also dictate which websites you can visit is giving you MORE choice.

Who is dictating what websites I can visit?
The ISPs? I have not heard of any ISP blocking content.
This sounds like an strawman designed to allow the goverment dictate what websites we can visit.
Now the goverment will have the tools to block content.
You don't believe in climate change? You are blocked mothefukar!

[Razgovory]

My main objection is to increasing regulations to solve a problem that doesn't exist.  One can argue that the problem will inevitably arise if the regulations are not imposed, but then one has the burden to demonstrate that this is, indeed, true.  Regulations have costs (including unforeseen consequences) and should be avoided except where necessary.

Your main objection is ideological.

[viper37]

You already have no choice, I don't see how letting them also dictate which websites you can visit is giving you MORE choice.

I have choice.  We're talking about you, here.  What company dictates which websites you can visit, and how do they let you know?

A while ago in Canada, Bell, a major ISP, was throttling the speed for Bittorrent applications.  It was also throttling the speed for ISPs renting their lines.

With a net neutrality ruling, Bell has to provide full service for its customers, all its customers.  If it advertise speeds of X mbit/s, it can't be X/4 for some content or some customers.

So, yes, sometimes, regulations are necessary to ensure free market.  The companies build their land and cellphone network via a protected monopoly for a while, wich they used to establish themselves as dominant players once it was deregulated.  We could discuss the legitimacy of establishing regional monopolies at first, but that's irrelevant to what must be done now to ensure a free market.