Page 1 of 19
Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2014 4:11 pm
by Leisher
Suffered a loss this week.
Here are some articles and an image on the subject.
How it affects gamers.
UK's PM wants to censor everyone's surfing.
What you can do?
The future?
Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2014 5:01 pm
by TPRJones
Don't forget to add on the -$29.95 fuck-you-Telco-I'm-going-with-someone-else charge.
If the big companies don't provide reasonable services they will go out of business as people move on to smaller providers that do give them what they want. It's inevitable. Although there may be a year or two of suckage in the meantime.
It's just like what is currently happening to the cell phone industry, really.
Edited By TPRJones on 1389996368
Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2014 5:10 pm
by Malcolm
Until they throttle the pr0n, no one will give a fuck.
Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2014 7:49 pm
by TheCatt
TPRJones wrote:If the big companies don't provide reasonable services they will go out of business as people move on to smaller providers that do give them what they want. It's inevitable. Although there may be a year or two of suckage in the meantime.
It's a lot easier to build a tower somewhere than it is to run cables to them. And wired will always be >> wireless for speed and price. Look how much wireless data costs. You can pay $80/month for 2-4GB at 5Mbps speeds. My wired connection is $60/month for 50Mbps speeds, with UNLIMITED data. I've used over 150GB some months.
Competition is very hard in the Internet arena, and will be for a while.
Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2014 9:22 pm
by TPRJones
True, but I don't think it will be that long. When the internet gets crappy, people will make a huge fuss. Within a couple of years there will be laws requiring carrier subcontracting much like with the phones.
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 2:17 pm
by Malcolm
FCC caves.
The FCC will release a proposal soon to reinstate net neutrality rules that would allow broadband providers to negotiate with content providers for preferential treatment, an agency official confirmed Wednesday.
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 4:56 pm
by GORDON
Money got to the right government people, finally.
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 5:27 pm
by Malcolm
I find it hilarious that they're still calling them the "net neutrality" rules when there's the word "preferential" in there. If this gets shitty enough, I will dust of my m4d sk1llz1es and start hacking wireless networks for free access.
Edited By Malcolm on 1398374905
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 7:25 pm
by GORDON
Yeah, the phrase is actually so misleading that I can never remember what side of the issue I am on, pro or con net neutrality.
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 7:28 pm
by TheCatt
On the other hand, shitty rules are an incentive for Google to build out better networks on their own.
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:07 pm
by GORDON
TheCatt wrote:On the other hand, shitty rules are an incentive for Google to build out better networks on their own.
How long until they go full evil, though? How long will the government ignore them? Won't Comcast eventually pay more senators more money and get the FCC siced on Google?
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:18 pm
by TheCatt
GORDON wrote:TheCatt wrote:On the other hand, shitty rules are an incentive for Google to build out better networks on their own.
How long until they go full evil, though? How long will the government ignore them? Won't Comcast eventually pay more senators more money and get the FCC siced on Google?
I think the latter is more likely than the former. Google isn't evil. Google has made my life better.
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:24 pm
by GORDON
As they say... "If you aren't paying for it, then you're the product." I don't think they are the dark force that Vince does, but I do wonder how much of our info is sold and surrendered to the government. The government stuff bothers me more. They have an IRS and killer drones and a willingness to use them.
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:44 pm
by Paul
GORDON wrote:Money got to the right government people, finally.
http://www.cnet.com/news....esident
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:48 pm
by GORDON
It is racist to point that out.
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:15 pm
by TPRJones
GORDON wrote:... but I do wonder how much of our info is sold and surrendered to the government..
By Google, probably not much at all. Government doesn't pay diddly. Now selling your info to advertisers, that's another story.
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:35 pm
by GORDON
Maybe the reason Google hasn't been attacked by senators with their hands out is because they already have their NSA closet in place.
Posted: Wed May 07, 2014 4:00 pm
by Malcolm
Stuart Smalley chimes in again.
"We can not allow the FCC to implement a pay-for-play system,"
Posted: Wed May 14, 2014 1:16 pm
by Malcolm
Posted: Wed May 14, 2014 2:16 pm
by TPRJones
He thinks like I do. Although the way our ISPs are currently structured - effective monopolies in many areas - it would be very rough for a lot of people for some time. But coming out the other end of that we'd have a mortally wounded Comcast and Time Warner and lots of new ISPs that are very good to their customers.
Making ISPs common carriers is all well and good, but it's a temporary measure and doesn't address the real problem that most large cable companies are downright hateful of their own customers. They need to be destroyed by the free market.
Edited By TPRJones on 1400091428