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
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Net Neutrality
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="FenderTL5" data-source="post: 72679581" data-attributes="member: 388072"><p>Sort of, yes.</p><p>As presumption: let's presume the AT&T Time Warner merger takes place and NN is eliminated. AT&T, one of the world's largest ISPs now has control of a huge sector of 'content' as well.</p><p>on the plus side; they'll be able to sell ISP service that limits you to only their content for a better rate. otoh, if you want access to content outside of their portfolio, they'll up-charge or just block it out right, slow it down etc.</p><p>the one image description (and this is OLD) looks like this:</p><p>[ATTACH]229060[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p></p><p>As already mentioned, the eavesdropping and censorship on the content side is not likely to change either way.</p><p>However, it's really difficult to assess because - in the beginning packet-neutrality existed because that's simply how it worked. It was later that packet discrimination became capable, and why the FCC under GOP leadership enacted NN laws under Title 1 to begin with (2005). Verizon won a case on the grounds that those NN rules could not be enforced under Title 1 in 2014.</p><p>So, just a few years ago, the FCC reclassified under Title II for the express purpose of being able to enforce the rules that already existed.</p><p>So, the reason you haven't seen a change is because it's been a 'touchy' back and forth going all the way back into the 90s.</p><p></p><p>The ISPs want to be able to discriminate so that they can make their own products/content more robust - at the expense of any competing content or products (<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-tech/post/atandt-lifts-facetime-restrictions-on-apple-iphones/2012/11/08/cbec36de-29de-11e2-b4e0-346287b7e56c_blog.html?utm_term=.fcb1774265d0" target="_blank">like when AT&T blocked Apple facetime on it's network to promote their own video chat product</a>).</p><p>It's also the reason why you see the ISPs actively purchasing content providers. They're building their own portfolios.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="FenderTL5, post: 72679581, member: 388072"] Sort of, yes. As presumption: let's presume the AT&T Time Warner merger takes place and NN is eliminated. AT&T, one of the world's largest ISPs now has control of a huge sector of 'content' as well. on the plus side; they'll be able to sell ISP service that limits you to only their content for a better rate. otoh, if you want access to content outside of their portfolio, they'll up-charge or just block it out right, slow it down etc. the one image description (and this is OLD) looks like this: [ATTACH]229060[/ATTACH] As already mentioned, the eavesdropping and censorship on the content side is not likely to change either way. However, it's really difficult to assess because - in the beginning packet-neutrality existed because that's simply how it worked. It was later that packet discrimination became capable, and why the FCC under GOP leadership enacted NN laws under Title 1 to begin with (2005). Verizon won a case on the grounds that those NN rules could not be enforced under Title 1 in 2014. So, just a few years ago, the FCC reclassified under Title II for the express purpose of being able to enforce the rules that already existed. So, the reason you haven't seen a change is because it's been a 'touchy' back and forth going all the way back into the 90s. The ISPs want to be able to discriminate so that they can make their own products/content more robust - at the expense of any competing content or products ([URL='https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-tech/post/atandt-lifts-facetime-restrictions-on-apple-iphones/2012/11/08/cbec36de-29de-11e2-b4e0-346287b7e56c_blog.html?utm_term=.fcb1774265d0']like when AT&T blocked Apple facetime on it's network to promote their own video chat product[/URL]). It's also the reason why you see the ISPs actively purchasing content providers. They're building their own portfolios. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Net Neutrality
Top
Bottom