Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
FCC votes down net neutrality 3-2
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DZoolander" data-source="post: 72104085" data-attributes="member: 186291"><p>Another argument I hear a lot is "Net Neutrality is only about 3 years old now. Why are you so concerned? Were things so bad before 2015?" </p><p></p><p>That argument doesn't resonate with me for a few reasons. </p><p></p><p>Primarily - the market landscape has changed pretty significantly over the past few years. Just a few years ago - I would argue that most ISPs (cable companies) viewed data as a nice little side business...but their primary business was cable TV packages. They'd charge you $80+ per month for varying types of TV packages - pay per view - etc. That was their primary business. Internet service was a nice little side business for them. They benefited from providing the best kind of broadband circumstantially - because they had a nice big coax pipe going into your house. But the $40-$50 per month they charged you was a nice little addon to the tidy profits they were making from their PRIMARY business - TV.</p><p></p><p>But that's really started to change over the past few years. More and more people are becoming cable cutters...and as luck would have it for the ISPs...they're now getting their TV through what the cable companies used to view as the side business. They're not getting the $80+ per month for TV. The customer is getting their TV through Hulu/NetFlix/YouTube live/DirectTV's streaming service, etc...all for $25-$40ish per month which the cable company gets NONE of.</p><p></p><p>...and the cable company is providing the pipe to do it. I think it galls them. After all - they no longer get the cable tv subscription fee, they don't get the rental fee for the TV box, etc. The customer still gets TV and the cable company is still providing the pipe by which the TV is delivered.</p><p></p><p>That's what's changed - and I think that removing net neutrality is their attempt to "remedy" that situation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DZoolander, post: 72104085, member: 186291"] Another argument I hear a lot is "Net Neutrality is only about 3 years old now. Why are you so concerned? Were things so bad before 2015?" That argument doesn't resonate with me for a few reasons. Primarily - the market landscape has changed pretty significantly over the past few years. Just a few years ago - I would argue that most ISPs (cable companies) viewed data as a nice little side business...but their primary business was cable TV packages. They'd charge you $80+ per month for varying types of TV packages - pay per view - etc. That was their primary business. Internet service was a nice little side business for them. They benefited from providing the best kind of broadband circumstantially - because they had a nice big coax pipe going into your house. But the $40-$50 per month they charged you was a nice little addon to the tidy profits they were making from their PRIMARY business - TV. But that's really started to change over the past few years. More and more people are becoming cable cutters...and as luck would have it for the ISPs...they're now getting their TV through what the cable companies used to view as the side business. They're not getting the $80+ per month for TV. The customer is getting their TV through Hulu/NetFlix/YouTube live/DirectTV's streaming service, etc...all for $25-$40ish per month which the cable company gets NONE of. ...and the cable company is providing the pipe to do it. I think it galls them. After all - they no longer get the cable tv subscription fee, they don't get the rental fee for the TV box, etc. The customer still gets TV and the cable company is still providing the pipe by which the TV is delivered. That's what's changed - and I think that removing net neutrality is their attempt to "remedy" that situation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
FCC votes down net neutrality 3-2
Top
Bottom