Net neutrality

It's no one's duty to inform those who chose to remain ignorant. You want information? There is plenty of that, literally at your finger tips. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/11/22/565962178/fccs-pai-heavy-handed-net-neutrality-rules-are-stifling-the-internet In other words, he gives no shits about the individual user. Rather, its all about the money. To put it simply. Or, you know, read what densetsu said.

**** those corporate *****! I already hate dealing with those sleazeballs and there is no way in hell I want them to touch the internet. They already give us shit services and we already pay so much out of our ***** just to have it. I've been spreading the word and would call my senators in a heartbeat if they were not already fighting for net neutrality. I need to check my Representative in the House though. Pai and his money grubbing buddies need to get the hell out.

(I had to cut some things out because I actually hit the word limit) All I'm saying is that instead of preaching you should be teaching. It requires less effort, and you come out cleaner in the end. Not everyone knows where to get information that everyone is talking about. Not everyone knows what things to sift through and what's credible or not. The link you gave me, still, gave me much more information than anyone here or anything else I've seen on the internet. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai Densetsu mentioned him, and he's the first I've seen. Did not point out that he was the FCC Chairman. "The Federal Communications Commission chairman announced plans Tuesday to repeal Obama-era regulations on Internet service providers." Within the announcement: "Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai released the following statement on his draft Restoring Internet Freedom Order, which was circulated to his fellow Commissioners this morning and will be voted on at the FCC’s Open Meeting on December 14" "But in 2015, the prior FCC bowed to pressure from President Obama. On a party-line vote, it imposed heavy-handed, utility-style regulations upon the Internet. That decision was a mistake." "Under my proposal, the federal government will stop micromanaging the Internet. Instead, the FCC would simply require Internet service providers to be transparent about their practices so that consumers can buy the service plan that’s best for them and entrepreneurs and other small businesses can have the technical information they need to innovate." “Additionally,as a result of my proposal, the Federal Trade Commission will once again be able to police ISPs, protect consumers, and promote competition, just as it did before 2015. Notably, my proposal will put the federal government’s most experienced privacy cop, the FTC, back on the beat to protect consumers’ online privacy." "Restoring Internet Freedom Order": "The Commission will consider a Declaratory Ruling, Report and Order, and Order that will restore Internet Freedom by returning broadband Internet access service to its prior classification as an information service, and reinstate the private mobile service classification of mobile broadband Internet access service. The item also will eliminate the Commission’s vague and expansive Internet Conduct Standard, along with the bright-line rules. Additionally, it will modify the transparency rule to promote additional transparency, while eliminating burdensome and unnecessary requirements. (WC Docket No. 17-108) CMRS Presumption Report & Order – The Commission will consider a Report and Order to harmonize the Commission’s rules by eliminating the commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) presumption, to be consistent with our flexible use approach to licensing. (WT Docket No. 16-240)" "Telecommunications Act of 1996" - https://transition.fcc.gov/Reports/tcom1996.txt "(1) QUALITY AND RATES- Quality services should be available at just, reasonable, and affordable rates. `(4) EQUITABLE AND NONDISCRIMINATORY CONTRIBUTIONS- All providers of telecommunications services should make an equitable and nondiscriminatory contribution to the preservation and advancement of universal service. `(7) ADDITIONAL PRINCIPLES- Such other principles as the Joint Board and the Commission determine are necessary and appropriate for the protection of the public interest, convenience, and necessity and are consistent with this Act. `(d) TELECOMMUNICATIONS CARRIER CONTRIBUTION- Every telecommunications carrier that provides interstate telecommunications services shall contribute, on an equitable and nondiscriminatory basis, to the specific, predictable, and sufficient mechanisms established by the Commission to preserve and advance universal service. The Commission may exempt a carrier or class of carriers from this requirement if the carrier's telecommunications activities are limited to such an extent that the level of such carrier's contribution to the preservation and advancement of universal service would be de minimis. Any other provider of interstate telecommunications may be required to contribute to the preservation and advancement of universal service if the public interest so requires. `(2) ADVANCED SERVICES- The Commission shall establish competitively neutral rules-- `(A) to enhance, to the extent technically feasible and economically reasonable, access to advanced telecommunications and information services for all public and nonprofit elementary and secondary school classrooms, health care providers, and libraries; and `(B) to define the circumstances under which a telecommunications carrier may be required to connect its network to such public institutional telecommunications users. `SEC. 257. MARKET ENTRY BARRIERS PROCEEDING. `(a) ELIMINATION OF BARRIERS- Within 15 months after the date of enactment of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Commission shall complete a proceeding for the purpose of identifying and eliminating, by regulations pursuant to its authority under this Act (other than this section), market entry barriers for entrepreneurs and other small businesses in the provision and ownership of telecommunications services and information services, or in the provision of parts or services to providers of telecommunications services and information services. `SEC. 258. ILLEGAL CHANGES IN SUBSCRIBER CARRIER SELECTIONS. `(a) PROHIBITION- No telecommunications carrier shall submit or execute a change in a subscriber's selection of a provider of telephone exchange service or telephone toll service except in accordance with such verification procedures as the Commission shall prescribe. Nothing in this section shall preclude any State commission from enforcing such procedures with respect to intrastate services." Aaaaand it's a long bill like any other. The gist so far is that many things are not so clear cut. It doesn't prohibit ISP's from throttling connections or giving special treatment, but it does strongly incentivize not doing so on any connection that the general public actually cares about. Any and all sudden changes to content delivery have to be pre-approved by the FCC. Additionally, anything that can be seen as an ISP making a newly formed business jump through hoops to start up will be eliminated by the FCC, which essentially means that ISP's can't throttle connections for newly established businesses, or charge exorbitant prices for them. It also dictates equal treatment to any and all consumers. Best of all it would establish that ISP's and all business entities involved, including the FCC, work to advance and spread internet technology to further offer a better service. So it doesn't prohibit dirty business strictly speaking, at least not explicitly, but it strongly discourages it through the FCC with threat of punishment, and it promotes overall growth. Furthermore, provisions can be added specifically to further regulate these kinds of dirty dealings. All with "public interest" as a determining factor. Many of the things that people fear regarding this potential change are concerning, and this classification would mean a greater amount of risk of these fears being realized. However there's nothing at all to suggest that these fears are anything more than boogie men, hiding in the closet, but never to be seen. As far as the level of information we've been provided, I'm still not content. The classification implies that further regulatory measures be taken, and as such the bill proposed must have special regulations within it, things that the general public has not yet seen. Of course, we've only been given a loose plan of where the bill would lead to, and not what exactly is in the bill, at least not that anything I've seen yet has pointed out. I imagine that only congress will know what's within the bill before it ever becomes a law. All that said, the things Ajit Pai laid out are sensible within the context of the telecommunications act. I don't necessarily see myself supporting this, but I'm much more willing to see this out now. That is unless someone can point out something I missed.

This is some serious shit, guys. The truth is that we can complain about this all we want, but if we don't act, then net neutrality is as good as dead. We gotta let these congressmen know how we feel about the issue. Go to this site, sign the petition and maybe give your congressman a call. https://www.battleforthenet.com/

@GunvoltX I 100% agree dude. I'm just sick of trying to educate and motivate people that don't care because they want to turn it into a partisan issue. It gets really exhausting after a while...

@Shinu The law states that internet providers must provide the same speed and accessibility to all websites. Repealing it means that the internet will be like TV, you have to buy access. It's just slimy corporate business that has no place on the good ol' interwebs.

Looks like there are actually people that believe what their internet providers and Pai say afterall >.> Edit: Apologies, that may have been a little trite of me. As stated in an earlier post, I just have no patience left for arguing with people that wont see facts on this one. I do believe I owe you an explanation on WHY everything you said is bullshit. You say they won't spend the money on these systems? Verizon and AT&T have already built and tested them WHILE TITLE 2 RULINGS HAVE BEEN IN PLACE. Of course the republican congress is so crooked in their favor that all they got was a slap on the wrist. Theyre literally just waiting to flick the switches on come the 14th. And spending money on infrastructure you say? Like the 400 BILLION in taxpayer dollars that the federal government gave Comcast for cablework that they just pocketed? Oh, they did pay some congressmen to sweep it under the rug, so they didnt get to keep ALL of it I guess.