http://tech.slashdot.org/story/15/04...net-neutrality

Republicans finding clever new ways to blast us all up our asses:

Republicans are trying to defund net neutrality. Will it work?

Care to take a guess when Comcast started to blackmail Netflix and when they settled?

Source: Washington Post

Net Neutrality, Iran Deal, ACA, immigration reform, gay marriage - is there anything positive our govt has done lately that Republicans aren't actively trying to **** up?

They're actively trying to **** up the civil rights act, but that was a while ago. Does that count?

Rubio, Cruz Try To Kill Neutrality On 1 Year Rule Anniversary

hahah nice try, everyone knows Rubio doesn't actually work on legislation

Monopoly telco providers are throttling Netflix downloads to gain leverage for better mobile deals, thereby proving that the telcos need to be more strictly regulated.

Wait, no, it's exactly the opposite of that and Netflix has been ****ing with the people it's purportedly at the mercy of. Whatever, regulate Comcast more.

I'm confused, do you live in a black and white world where one side being ****ty suddenly means the other side is a-okay?

Netflix says they're doing it so mobile users won't hit data caps.

Another possible interpretation that Netflix probably isn't likely to cop to: giving partners preferential treatment and giving customers of competing services a worse experience

Does anyone know if they're partnered with Sprint or T-Mobile?

I'm in a world where people have been saying for years that Comcast has so much market power that content providers need regulation to protect them from Comcast and it turns out that content providers actually have market power over Comcast that they can leverage to get better treatment. Putting it in terms of ****ty or not ****ty is not really relevant. I don't think Comcast, Netflix, Google or anyone else are especially altruistic. The question is whether Comcast is going to shut down Netflix to protect its cable TV business from competition. Seems like the answer is no, definitely not.

This seems like a bit of a strawman, wasn't Comcast verifiably throttling their customers' bandwidth to Netflix to extort payments from them? Did that not happen?

Your original post earlier just seems super salty about people ever calling for regulation on Comcast in the first place, even though a.) Comcast definitely earned the hate, and b.) that episode has zero to do with this one, except to the extent that Netflix is being hypocritical now

I don't think the bigger concern was ever for established players like Netflix, although having to pay to avoid throttling would certainly hurt their bottom line. The concern is over other streaming startups that could be shut out of ever getting off the ground w/o preferred bandwidth agreements/capital.

All this talk of hypocrisy and earning hate is really irrelevant. There was indeed a business dispute between Comcast and Netflix about, IIRC, how some infrastructure improvements would be funded. Comcast used access to its services as leverage. Now there's a dispute between Comcast and Netflix about how data usage is charged. Netflix is using access to its services as leverage. The question is why should these kinds of business disputes be regulated by the government so that Netflix always wins? The old theory was that Comcast had so much power that it would always crush the little guy (Netflix) by withholding access. That theory seems demonstrably false if Netflix is willingly restricting its access to Comcast to hurt Comcast.

That's a fine theory, but it seems wildly implausible. For one, AFAIK this has never happened, and the window where ISPs had monopoly control over internet access is rapidly closing. Second, all these start-ups are running on AWS, and you have to assume that Amazon would crush Comcast if Comcast started ****ing with their connections, right?

Oh wow, I missed this gem of a post when it first came out.

I think you're confusing mobile providers for Comcast now, but that aside, who (besides the caricatures of liberals that you hold in your head) thinks the government should regulate the current dispute so that Netflix wins? You literally linked to a Slate article titled "Netflix Has Been Degrading Video Quality on AT&T/Verizon and It’s Really Messed Up" but came in here with blah blah meow chow regulate Comcast more, and now this?

I guess this works if you accept as a necessity that every company on the planet inexorably link themselves with some company, somewhere, that's big enough to have clout with all the other big companies that could potentially **** them. As long as everyone's paying their dues to some Very Large Company somewhere, everything will be okay. Big guys gotta get their cut.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/15/te...rt-ruling.html

https://www.wired.com/2017/01/year-d...et-neutrality/

Hope mason is ready to open up his wallet to pay for preferred treatment for this site when net neutrality is assassinated.

Don't think Trump can do **** about it. There would be too much backlash and the tech industry's lobby is quite powerful.

Bump

Trump's new FCC guy is anti net neutrality. ****ing ****


https://www.cnet.com/news/donald-tru...-pai-head-fcc/

As if we didn't see this coming.

By us, i of course mean everyone except trump supporters. The rate hike mason is about to have to pay for is going to be a huge surprise to him.

Mason doesn't understand that labor costs and profit margins do not dictate supply and demand. So I doubt he'll be able to process that his rates went up because of net neutrality.

He also thought Trump would be good for online poker. Let that sink in.

Identity politics bro.