This all confuses me. Could you help me out with what exactly this all means please? I have Netflix I pay monthly at $13.99, does this mean I now have to pay the $13.99 +the $10 to access it? Also I use the free option for Pandora, Spotify and Iheart Radio, does this now mean their not free anymore and I would have to pay the $10 now each time I listened to music? Thank you so much for your answer.
Really? Damn it. A co worker had said that he saw something about Netflix now charging a $1 a movie/ episode. Is any of that true? Would that be in addition to the monthly fee I already pay?
As the U.S. Federal Communications Commission prepares to rollback net neutrality protections, the Canadian government has used the controversy to double down on its support for net neutrality safeguards, linking it to democracy, equality, and freedom of expression.
Ok! my turn. Just listening to a discussion about net nuetrality on the radio just now. CA is now going to implement it's own version, err so is reported. They say an ISP should not be able to block content nor throttle down delivery. Now my question is unless the ISP has redundant hardware resources, how do they avoid throttling down the average through put when enough users stream large data sources like movies to exceed the system capacity? You can not expect them to support and unknown number of source sending and unknown volume of data, to the maximum number of requestors. Hardware must be provide to serve the mean at a profitable price. Or did I miss something?
Anyone arguing that ending Net Neutrality is a good thing, is highly delusional, and incredibly naive to think the ISPs, and those who monopolize and control them, will not abuse their new found powers. This is bad for everybody, except for the people running the 4 or 5 companies who own all of the ISPs available to U.S. consumers. Don't be that guy. You are on the wrong side of history.
By utilizing the vast unused capabilities of existing fiber infrastructure? https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/...ith-fiberbut-telecom-lobbying-keeps-it-unused
Damned if I see how you can view this as morality issue, a fairness issue, a freedom issue or... It is a price for performance issue. But, I may have missed something! I do accept clues.
Literally already happening in Portugal where Net Neutrality doesn't exist. http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-portugal-internet-20171127-story.html
The biggest question is why we're going to let this happen under a 3-2 vote. What the fuck do we have congress for?
It has to go through congress still. The TV industry already paid 3 people at the head of the FCC so it was going to pass. It wont pass the senate/congress. There would be such an outcry. The -only- people it benefits is the corporations that will directly benefit from the repeal. That is literally it. No one else. If our congress does indeed pass this, they literally let 3 people dictate what happens to hundreds of millions. What you do have to remember, though, is that much of congress is up for seats next year. It would behoove them to side with the public if they want their seats and their tax breaks and all the perks of being a puppet. I am almost certain it wont pass. But if it does, watch out. In this day and age, you can live without TV. But the internet is so ubiquitous with students/work/home that it would cause such an impact.... just watch out for the backlash.
used to be able to see Sonny Liston fight Cassius Clay on free television...now it's all pay for view...people were outraged but it's still pay for view today
