It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
MajicMan: Happy to have the free-market internet back, now no unelected government bastard can just dictate what and how data is transferred over the net by fiat. We aren't China just letting the government bureaucracy create the great firewall.
I think you fail to understand what net neutrality is.

avatar
tinyE:
It's a standalone prequel to the sequel from before the original.

avatar
amok: No, you are in the US of A where you are letting the big corporations do it in stead.
And at least we have (some) control over what the government does.
avatar
amok: No, you are in the US of A where you are letting the big corporations do it in stead.
avatar
T.Hodd: And at least we have (some) control over what the government does.
LOL
avatar
tinyE: I'm confused.

Is GWENT a stand alone game from Witcher or a sequel?
avatar
Tannath: Reboot.
That was a great show.
Haha, you suckers! Y'all with your high speed internet, they can cap certain content you might access. For those like me with less than 1Mbps, good luck making ANY site run slower than that!

Bwaahahhahhahaahhaha!




Oh, wait.
Copy-pasta for your local congressman & the FCC

Yesterday, AT&T violated the principle of net neutrality, completely blocking access to img.4chan.org. This action is in contradiction to the spirit of a country such as ours, where access to information is seen not as a commodity, but as our right as American citizens. I am personally appalled that a company that specifically stated in the merger agreement submitted to the FCC that allowed it to become the largest ISP in the country that it would not do anything like this has reneged on its commitment to its customers and to the nation, six months after the expiration of that clause. The timing on this couldn't be better. AT&T has decided to see exactly where its limits are now that it is no longer bound by that agreement.

In January 2007, a bill was introduced that would have made this action illegal. Our president was one of the co-sponsors of that bill, and the Democratic Party in general was the impetus behind it. I hope you will bring this egregious violation of the rights of 15% of the internet-using American public to the attention of your fellow Commerce, Science, and Transportation committee members as soon as possible, and (whether through modification of the bill introduced two years ago or through the authorship of a new bill) attempt to safeguard my right, the right of the rest of your constituents, and the right of every American citizen to unfettered internet access, free from the censorship that could eventually lead to an Orwellian megacorporation controlling what we can and cannot see. If our elected government has seen fit not to violate net neutrality, the corporations we pay for internet access surely have no right. Please do everything in your power to remind them of this.

Thank you for your time.
TL;DR the pepedos have, collectively, a shorter memory span than the tadpoles from which they originated.
avatar
HereForTheBeer: Haha, you suckers! Y'all with your high speed internet, they can cap certain content you might access. For those like me with less than 1Mbps, good luck making ANY site run slower than that!

Bwaahahhahhahaahhaha!

Oh, wait.
bet mine is slower than yours hot shot!

HA! I guess the foots on the other hand now isn't it, Kramer!
avatar
HereForTheBeer: Haha, you suckers! Y'all with your high speed internet, they can cap certain content you might access. For those like me with less than 1Mbps, good luck making ANY site run slower than that!

Bwaahahhahhahaahhaha!

Oh, wait.
avatar
tinyE: bet mine is slower than yours hot shot!

HA! I guess the foots on the other hand now isn't it, Kramer!
Surely you can't be serious?
avatar
MajicMan: Happy to have the free-market internet back
If the court cases don't change it anyway. There are people who actually want to kill them and their families now just because of the extensive fearmongering and misinformation on it.

I also find it ironic and amusing that a lot of the companies virtue signalling for it and pretending to be anti-censorship are some of the largest censorship platforms out there.
Just read about this. Damn. I just hope that "model" is not exported to other places in the world. In Argentina we have pretty bad services but no bandwith cap, or download cap... But if for some reason other countries start following that, we might as well be in that list too. I am all for free internet not controlled by the goverment, but if you can't change ISP without moving, that's just like "cyber kidnapping" or something.
Post edited December 15, 2017 by jonridan
avatar
MaximumBunny: censorship platforms
"Censorship platform" is an oxymoron. You're not entitled to a platform.
avatar
HereForTheBeer: Haha, you suckers! Y'all with your high speed internet, they can cap certain content you might access. For those like me with less than 1Mbps, good luck making ANY site run slower than that!

Bwaahahhahhahaahhaha!

Oh, wait.
avatar
tinyE: bet mine is slower than yours hot shot!

HA! I guess the foots on the other hand now isn't it, Kramer!
Challenge accepted!

That's my every day, not a reduced speed after reaching some data cap.

---

From a practical standpoint, I have to wonder what effect the 'lanes' might have. For one, ISPs use network speed as an advertising tool: highest speed to lure customers. I have a hard time seeing them drop those speeds so far down that 1080p streaming is hampered. And let's face it, HD streaming is what most customers are concerned with. Locally the telco gives up to 40Mb and the cableco is 60Mb. For them to hurt a Netflix stream, you're talking dropping it down to less than 10Mbps. Do they have the balls to go from 40Mbps down to less than 10Mbps for video content, just because you're watching Netflix instead of their own TV offerings?

Would they gank the download speed for little ol' gOg? We don't know.

For the ISPs to hurt your experience with, say, shopping, Wikipedia, that sort of thing, they'd have to dump it down to a few megabits or worse. Would they be throttling far enough to hurt students doing their homework research? Probably not, unless one is researching content streaming from hulu, for instance. I can't imagine them hitting, say, .edu domains.

Obviously, it remains to be seen what they actually do.

-----

I am bothered by one detail, and maybe there's some technical info that skews what I'm thinking. Our connections to any content will almost always go through more than just the ISPs lines. For example, my tracert from here to youtube.com takes over a dozen hops and only the first few appear to be my ISP. The ISP is essentially throttling the entire path, even though most of the route isn't theirs.
Attachments:
it_is_on.png (76 Kb)
avatar
MajicMan: The FCC voted 3-2 to repeal Net Neutrality (the government regulation created in 2015 branding all ISPs as Title II utilities) and the internet did not break. What. A. Shock.
Do you think that government policies are magic spells that take immediate effect?
avatar
MajicMan: The FCC voted 3-2 to repeal Net Neutrality (the government regulation created in 2015 branding all ISPs as Title II utilities) and the internet did not break. What. A. Shock.
avatar
SirPrimalform: Do you think that government policies are magic spells that take immediate effect?
Well, his name is MajicMan after all. :P

I wonder how long this spell would last when converted into D&D rounds? :P
Post edited December 15, 2017 by Lucian_Galca
avatar
SirPrimalform: Do you think that government policies are magic spells that take immediate effect?
avatar
Lucian_Galca: Well, his name is MajicMan after all. :P

I wonder how long this spell would last when converted into D&D rounds? :P
Of course, it all makes sense now.
My take on this: Big money wins big in the US. I wish I would be an investor.