Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Net neutrality gone - Invest in an internet provider?

  1. #1
    Uncensored Hypocrite stevedmc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Baton Rouge, LA
    VIN
    16510
    Posts
    5,953

    Net neutrality gone - Invest in an internet provider?

    I have a confession, I recently ditched AT&T internet and switched to Exede/Viasat satellite internet. They have a community forum which I've been participating in for a bit. It's caused me to not be loyal to this forum.

    Anyway, someone brought up the idea of investing in Viasat. Since net neutrality is gone, this could be a really good time to invest in internet companies. Any thoughts?

    Here is the discussion from the other forum:

    https://community.viasat.com/viasat/...tock-in-viasat
    Rest assured, we have a backup of Farrar's car blog and it will be restored in the near future. (Steve Rice - March 2016)
    Rest assured, we have a backup of Shep's posts and all of them will be restored in the near future. (Steve Rice - March 2017)

  2. #2
    To be fair, net neutrality is simply returned to how it was in 2015. Those restrictions have not even been in place long enough to have made much change. Also keep in mind that Netflix getting screwed by Comcast and forced to pay them so people on Comcast will quit getting crappy speeds while streaming, happened AFTER this bill was created.

    We don't need FCC or congress to pass any "net neutrality" bill. What we need is for them to pass a bill pulling the last mile of fiber OUT of the control of the incumbent ISPs and returned to being a municipal property. This would allow anybody to be able to fairly build their own ISP that would be competitive. If someone started being a butthole about whether you get good speeds to a particular site (or access at all) you can give them the digital finger and easily rip them out and go to a decent one that will fulfill their end of the bargain. The only reason people wanted that net neutrality bill in the first place is because congress gave those companies monopoly status in their regions, and these companies agreed to avoid competition in those regions. I don't believe you solve poor legislation with more legislation. That's just my .00004 BTC worth.

  3. #3
    Linux Janitor
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    VIN
    4055
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by sedated View Post
    To be fair, net neutrality is simply returned to how it was in 2015. Those restrictions have not even been in place long enough to have made much change. Also keep in mind that Netflix getting screwed by Comcast and forced to pay them so people on Comcast will quit getting crappy speeds while streaming, happened AFTER this bill was created.

    We don't need FCC or congress to pass any "net neutrality" bill. What we need is for them to pass a bill pulling the last mile of fiber OUT of the control of the incumbent ISPs and returned to being a municipal property. This would allow anybody to be able to fairly build their own ISP that would be competitive. If someone started being a butthole about whether you get good speeds to a particular site (or access at all) you can give them the digital finger and easily rip them out and go to a decent one that will fulfill their end of the bargain. The only reason people wanted that net neutrality bill in the first place is because congress gave those companies monopoly status in their regions, and these companies agreed to avoid competition in those regions. I don't believe you solve poor legislation with more legislation. That's just my .00004 BTC worth.

    you're incorrect on several points that paints this picture as "government overreach" vs the reality of ISPs having conflicts of interest by also acting as content providers.

    1. the netflix throttling issue with comcast AND verizon was in 2014, 1 year PRIOR to the net neutrality rules
    https://technical.ly/philly/2014/05/...mcast-roundup/

    2. there never was nor is any net neutrality "bill". it was a regulatory statute written by the FCC to implement Title II (common carrier) regulations on ISPs, same as already in place for standard telecos. that regulation went into effect in April, 2015, and was repealed in December, 2017. Title II's common carrier classification forbade ISPs from throttling or blocking data coming to your endpoint.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_carrier

    the current rules that just repealed title ii also put in place preemption. this new rule double screws consumers. now if a state tries to implement tighter net neutrality or privacy rules that ISPs would have to follow in said state, the FCC has the ability to sue and force the state to follow the federal government's guidelines only.
    https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...utrality-laws/

  4. #4
    I do not know what any of this means. Is it safe to say comcast is evil (again)?
    Bungee Cup Holder Guru

  5. #5
    Linux Janitor
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    VIN
    4055
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by Duplicate Account View Post
    I do not know what any of this means. Is it safe to say comcast is evil (again)?
    who ever said they weren't?

  6. #6
    Yes and no. The Netflix and Comcast issue carried well into 2016, not resolved until around July of 2016. Netflix ended up coughing up cash to make Comcast allow their traffic to be peered correctly. I did misspeak when calling it a "bill", I was just being overly simplistic in my description.

    I agree it's 100% conflict of interest for ISPs to be content creators/providers... and I never implied it was government overreach, it is more or less within the bounds of what the government is there for... but I believe it is misapplied. They granted monopoly status to these ISPs and as long as they are allowed to own the last mile of fiber or coax to the customer they can strong-arm any new ISP out of the business. This is despite the fact that the government gave them over 200 billion (if I recall) to build out fiber lines to connect the country. Most of them took the money and have nothing of worth to show for it. Essentially, taxpayers foot the bill for much of that fiber, and ISPs have staked their claim on it and use it to prevent anyone else from starting up a better competing service. Not even Google has been able to penetrate the market in many places.

  7. #7
    Linux Janitor
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    VIN
    4055
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by sedated View Post
    I agree it's 100% conflict of interest for ISPs to be content creators/providers... and I never implied it was government overreach, it is more or less within the bounds of what the government is there for... but I believe it is misapplied. They granted monopoly status to these ISPs and as long as they are allowed to own the last mile of fiber or coax to the customer they can strong-arm any new ISP out of the business. This is despite the fact that the government gave them over 200 billion (if I recall) to build out fiber lines to connect the country. Most of them took the money and have nothing of worth to show for it. Essentially, taxpayers foot the bill for much of that fiber, and ISPs have staked their claim on it and use it to prevent anyone else from starting up a better competing service. Not even Google has been able to penetrate the market in many places.
    All of this i agree with.

    i think we agree more than i realized. sorry if i came off as boorish in my previous reply to you. this is one of the few issues i'm very invested in, both due to personal and professional reasons.

    i see the internet as becoming the defacto means of all people go get information. any entity that tries to stifle, restrict or otherwise impede ones ability to access said information, to me, is doing a great disservice to its customers. current both public and private sectors seem to at best forget, at worst, ignore the fact that the primary role of the tier 1 ISPs is to grant unfettered access to the resources which serve that information at an agreed upon connection speed. nothing more.

  8. #8
    Uncensored Hypocrite stevedmc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Baton Rouge, LA
    VIN
    16510
    Posts
    5,953
    We are living in the information society.
    Rest assured, we have a backup of Farrar's car blog and it will be restored in the near future. (Steve Rice - March 2016)
    Rest assured, we have a backup of Shep's posts and all of them will be restored in the near future. (Steve Rice - March 2017)

  9. #9
    As seen on TV! Dracula's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Tomball, TX
    VIN
    3676
    Posts
    4,581
    Blog Entries
    2
    Install your intake, you lazy redneck! Do you know how much work I put into that thing?
    -Chad K.
    Previous owner of VINS: 6982, 1601, 1265, and 1269

    "Count of Islandia; Colonel of the Defense Forces and Chancellor of Transportation."

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by novadmc View Post
    All of this i agree with.

    i think we agree more than i realized. sorry if i came off as boorish in my previous reply to you. this is one of the few issues i'm very invested in, both due to personal and professional reasons.

    i see the internet as becoming the defacto means of all people go get information. any entity that tries to stifle, restrict or otherwise impede ones ability to access said information, to me, is doing a great disservice to its customers. current both public and private sectors seem to at best forget, at worst, ignore the fact that the primary role of the tier 1 ISPs is to grant unfettered access to the resources which serve that information at an agreed upon connection speed. nothing more.
    It's okay. I'm IT too, it's the only career field I've ever known. I have the same specific interest in the internet being open that I'm sure you do.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •