Welp, in my area Comcast recently sent out throttling notices for customers who use more than 250g per month. Guess we all aren't having the same experience.

We don't get throttled, we just get charged extra at 1TB. I'm cool with that, believe it or not. The internet is a public utility, but I'm billed usage for water and electricity, so data caps make sense as long as they're reasonable. I've actually got a serious problem with throttling, as it's a hidden cap.

I don't think that's a fair way to go about it though. Water and Electricity is an actual resource though. Data usage doesn't spike costs on the ISPs side.

---

We don't get throttled, we just get charged extra at 1TB. I'm cool with that, believe it or not. The internet is a public utility, but I'm billed usage for water and electricity, so data caps make sense as long as they're reasonable. I've actually got a serious problem with throttling, as it's a hidden cap.

I don't think that's a fair way to go about it though. Water and Electricity is an actual resource though. Data usage doesn't spike costs on the ISPs side.

Water/Electric =/= Internet

Water and Electric are essential daily needs.
Internet, not so much.

Can't compare them.

This whole thing is just another chicken little subject.

https://www.neowin.net/news/editorial-th...o-big-deal

This is a good read for those who are ready to jump off the nearest tall building over the worry of what the World of Internet will look like Post-Net Neutrality.

---

I don't think that's a fair way to go about it though. Water and Electricity is an actual resource though. Data usage doesn't spike costs on the ISPs side.

Water/Electric =/= Internet

Water and Electric are essential daily needs.
Internet, not so much.

Can't compare them.

This whole thing is just another chicken little subject.

https://www.neowin.net/news/editorial-th...o-big-deal

This is a good read for those who are ready to jump off the nearest tall building over the worry of what the World of Internet will look like Post-Net Neutrality.

That's a horribly unconvincing article.

All it says is without net neutrality rates will likely go up across the board and that we shouldn't worry about net neutrality going because there are already examples of companies doing as they please.

---

I don't think that's a fair way to go about it though. Water and Electricity is an actual resource though. Data usage doesn't spike costs on the ISPs side.

Water/Electric =/= Internet

Water and Electric are essential daily needs.
Internet, not so much.

Really? Try and post here without the internet. Try to do your job without the internet. Try to get a job without the internet. Try getting a credit card without the internet, finding a house or apartment, buying a car, paying your bills, managing your bank account, getting a bank account, the list goes on.

Possible? Sure, mostly. Getting a job without access to the internet is all but impossible, and the overwhelming majority of jobs, require internet access. But having access to the internet limited or restricted puts you at an unfair disadvantage, and in many ways will make modern life just this side of impossible. The internet is a necessity and a public utility in 2017, and it shouldn't be throttled or restricted any more than the water company should tell you that [BLEEP] in your guest bathroom toilet will cost an additional $9.99 per month.

---

Water/Electric =/= Internet

Water and Electric are essential daily needs.
Internet, not so much.

Really? Try and post here without the internet. Try to do your job without the internet. Try to get a job without the internet. Try getting a credit card without the internet, finding a house or apartment, buying a car, paying your bills, managing your bank account, getting a bank account, the list goes on.

Possible? Sure, mostly. Getting a job without access to the internet is all but impossible, and the overwhelming majority of jobs, require internet access. But having access to the internet limited or restricted puts you at an unfair disadvantage, and in many ways will make modern life just this side of impossible. The internet is a necessity and a public utility in 2017, and it shouldn't be throttled or restricted any more than the water company should tell you that [BLEEP] in your guest bathroom toilet will cost an additional $9.99 per month.

Hyperbole is strong in this one.

One doesn't need Netflix level throughput to search for a job, send E-mail, search cars.com, or pay your phone bill. One could do that with an AOL 56K baud connection. Watching video over the internet is not a critical need.

A Network Neutrality bill is a reasonable debate topic. If it really is something that needs to be done, it needs to be passed by Congress. Obama's FCC far exceeded its authority in essentially writing a law, and Trump's FCC is doing the right thing in putting the law back in Congressional hands.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Water/Electric =/= Internet

Water and Electric are essential daily needs.
Internet, not so much.

Really? Try and post here without the internet. Try to do your job without the internet. Try to get a job without the internet. Try getting a credit card without the internet, finding a house or apartment, buying a car, paying your bills, managing your bank account, getting a bank account, the list goes on.

Possible? Sure, mostly. Getting a job without access to the internet is all but impossible, and the overwhelming majority of jobs, require internet access. But having access to the internet limited or restricted puts you at an unfair disadvantage, and in many ways will make modern life just this side of impossible. The internet is a necessity and a public utility in 2017, and it shouldn't be throttled or restricted any more than the water company should tell you that [BLEEP] in your guest bathroom toilet will cost an additional $9.99 per month.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

I know people that live without the internet dude.
Work without internet.
Credit cards are not necessities. Get a bank account by going to the bank. Manage a bank account with a check book. Pay your bills by going down to the utility or sending a check in the mail.
Get a job by getting off your [BLEEP] and hussle through some applications and handing out resumes. (Employers actually love the initiative shown by people willing to go in and try to get a job)
OMG what a terrible life to have to do some leg work without the internet.

It's only essential to life to those who have lived their whole lives inside the damn computer.
Get out in the world, it exists beyond your screen kid.

Bunch of sissies in today's world... makes me sick.
If your government can't control these corporations with net neutrality, why is it needed?
If they've been limiting your net searches already, what are you afraid of?

Oh... that's right, everything must be over regulated... because regulation works soooo well.

---

Really? Try and post here without the internet. Try to do your job without the internet. Try to get a job without the internet. Try getting a credit card without the internet, finding a house or apartment, buying a car, paying your bills, managing your bank account, getting a bank account, the list goes on.

Possible? Sure, mostly. Getting a job without access to the internet is all but impossible, and the overwhelming majority of jobs, require internet access. But having access to the internet limited or restricted puts you at an unfair disadvantage, and in many ways will make modern life just this side of impossible. The internet is a necessity and a public utility in 2017, and it shouldn't be throttled or restricted any more than the water company should tell you that [BLEEP] in your guest bathroom toilet will cost an additional $9.99 per month.

Oh... that's right, everything must be over regulated... because regulation works soooo well.

These are monopolies, not small businesses on Main St. They don't play by the same rules that local companies do. They make it impossible for anyone else to infringe on their turf, they gouge their customers for every penny, and now they not only have the FCC's seal of approval to do so, but they can legally hide fees in your bill and make you pay for a social media package, or a Google package, or decide that you're not allowed to view Netflix because they have a deal with Hulu.

There's no "free market" in telecommunications. There are only monopolies, and monopolies are controlled only be regulation. And I invite you to try living without the internet for a week.

Here's a hint: you can't.

---

Really? Try and post here without the internet. Try to do your job without the internet. Try to get a job without the internet. Try getting a credit card without the internet, finding a house or apartment, buying a car, paying your bills, managing your bank account, getting a bank account, the list goes on.

Possible? Sure, mostly. Getting a job without access to the internet is all but impossible, and the overwhelming majority of jobs, require internet access. But having access to the internet limited or restricted puts you at an unfair disadvantage, and in many ways will make modern life just this side of impossible. The internet is a necessity and a public utility in 2017, and it shouldn't be throttled or restricted any more than the water company should tell you that [BLEEP] in your guest bathroom toilet will cost an additional $9.99 per month.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

I know people that live without the internet dude.
Work without internet.
Credit cards are not necessities. Get a bank account by going to the bank. Manage a bank account with a check book. Pay your bills by going down to the utility or sending a check in the mail.
Get a job by getting off your [BLEEP] and hussle through some applications and handing out resumes. (Employers actually love the initiative shown by people willing to go in and try to get a job)
OMG what a terrible life to have to do some leg work without the internet.

It's only essential to life to those who have lived their whole lives inside the damn computer.
Get out in the world, it exists beyond your screen kid.

Bunch of sissies in today's world... makes me sick.
If your government can't control these corporations with net neutrality, why is it needed?
If they've been limiting your net searches already, what are you afraid of?

Oh... that's right, everything must be over regulated... because regulation works soooo well.

I mean I understand where you're coming from but in the not too distant future, all those things you talked about will be obsolete. There won't be checkbooks. Banks create your account using the internet. Applications will be strictly online and not handing in a piece of paper.

Although the whole "Life exists beyond your screen" mantra is nice, it's not the way its going to be. Everything is going to be done by computers, the internet and machines soon.

"Bunch of sissies"? You're better than that (or maybe you're not) but just because the future is going to be different than when you grew up, it doesn't make it bad. "Color TV! Back in my day, we only had the radio. Kids today are so soft." See how that works?

---

Really? Try and post here without the internet. Try to do your job without the internet. Try to get a job without the internet. Try getting a credit card without the internet, finding a house or apartment, buying a car, paying your bills, managing your bank account, getting a bank account, the list goes on.

Possible? Sure, mostly. Getting a job without access to the internet is all but impossible, and the overwhelming majority of jobs, require internet access. But having access to the internet limited or restricted puts you at an unfair disadvantage, and in many ways will make modern life just this side of impossible. The internet is a necessity and a public utility in 2017, and it shouldn't be throttled or restricted any more than the water company should tell you that [BLEEP] in your guest bathroom toilet will cost an additional $9.99 per month.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

I know people that live without the internet dude.
Work without internet.
Credit cards are not necessities. Get a bank account by going to the bank. Manage a bank account with a check book. Pay your bills by going down to the utility or sending a check in the mail.
Get a job by getting off your [BLEEP] and hussle through some applications and handing out resumes. (Employers actually love the initiative shown by people willing to go in and try to get a job)
OMG what a terrible life to have to do some leg work without the internet.

It's only essential to life to those who have lived their whole lives inside the damn computer.
Get out in the world, it exists beyond your screen kid.

Bunch of sissies in today's world... makes me sick.
If your government can't control these corporations with net neutrality, why is it needed?
If they've been limiting your net searches already, what are you afraid of?

Oh... that's right, everything must be over regulated... because regulation works soooo well.

Yeah okay, I can move to Alaska, build a log cabin and live off the land. Don't even need any currency, just trade in goods and services. Guess Money isn't necessary either. The fact that you're even making this argument on the internet is highly ironic.

---

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

I know people that live without the internet dude.
Work without internet.
Credit cards are not necessities. Get a bank account by going to the bank. Manage a bank account with a check book. Pay your bills by going down to the utility or sending a check in the mail.
Get a job by getting off your [BLEEP] and hussle through some applications and handing out resumes. (Employers actually love the initiative shown by people willing to go in and try to get a job)
OMG what a terrible life to have to do some leg work without the internet.

It's only essential to life to those who have lived their whole lives inside the damn computer.
Get out in the world, it exists beyond your screen kid.

Bunch of sissies in today's world... makes me sick.
If your government can't control these corporations with net neutrality, why is it needed?
If they've been limiting your net searches already, what are you afraid of?

Oh... that's right, everything must be over regulated... because regulation works soooo well.

Yeah okay, I can move to Alaska, build a log cabin and live off the land. Don't even need any currency, just trade in goods and services. Guess Money isn't necessary either. The fact that you're even making this argument on the internet is highly ironic.

Not really.

He's earned the privilege of having the internet through hard working and paying his bills.

If others can't do it - they don't deserve it to begin with.

---

As I've stated previously in this thread, the people who stream content seem to be the ones most upset with the NN situation. As a functional tool, NN will make no difference in my internet use because I stream very little. However, the ones who watch hours of shows every week will be targeted because they use the bulk of the bandwidth. So the question comes down to if ISPs are allowed to throttle or charge more for those who use internet resources more than others. If we were talking about water with a finite delivery capacity, shouldn't customers who use far larger amounts be limited or charged more? Is my analogy wrong?

---

Yeah okay, I can move to Alaska, build a log cabin and live off the land. Don't even need any currency, just trade in goods and services. Guess Money isn't necessary either. The fact that you're even making this argument on the internet is highly ironic.

Not really.

He's earned the privilege of having the internet through hard working and paying his bills.

If others can't do it - they don't deserve it to begin with.

Are there people arguing the internet should be free? I'd just prefer the ISPs not have a complete monopoly and the legal authority to throttle competition and hike prices.

---

Yeah okay, I can move to Alaska, build a log cabin and live off the land. Don't even need any currency, just trade in goods and services. Guess Money isn't necessary either. The fact that you're even making this argument on the internet is highly ironic.

Not really.

He's earned the privilege of having the internet through hard working and paying his bills.

If others can't do it - they don't deserve it to begin with.

You have no clue what you’re talking about lol

---

Those arguing for net neutrality should not do it based on the idea that it's an essential commodity. I think the best way to win this argument is around how ISPs often hold monopolies.

Some people have made this argument, but it always seems to return to end-of-the-world scenarios and labeling the internet as important as water. A lot people don't agree with that. Everyone knows they don't have options when it comes to ISPs. Use that aspect and tell them that they now hold even more power.

That's personally how I see it. I wont support the repeal of net neutrality unless the monopolies go away.

---

 If we were talking about water with a finite delivery capacity, shouldn't customers who use far larger amounts be limited or charged more? Is my analogy wrong?

It's wrong in the sense that you'e not being charged for using up more pipe space in the water lines... You're being charged for using the actual water. So.. I don't think it's fair to charge someone for using the Bandwith since that's already sitting there waiting to be used. If someone uses a lot of bandwith during non peak times, it's not fair to charge him more because there's probably plenty of bandwith not currently being utilized. We're already throttled during peak hours to prevent us from using too much Bandwith, and that's fair enough. A more accurate comparison is being charged for through fare, which we're already paying for in the form of data plans and limits.... If I pay for unlimited, I should get unlimited. Not an additional separate charge for using up bandwith that's designed to be used.

---

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

I know people that live without the internet dude.
Work without internet.
Credit cards are not necessities. Get a bank account by going to the bank. Manage a bank account with a check book. Pay your bills by going down to the utility or sending a check in the mail.
Get a job by getting off your [BLEEP] and hussle through some applications and handing out resumes. (Employers actually love the initiative shown by people willing to go in and try to get a job)
OMG what a terrible life to have to do some leg work without the internet.

It's only essential to life to those who have lived their whole lives inside the damn computer.
Get out in the world, it exists beyond your screen kid.

Bunch of sissies in today's world... makes me sick.
If your government can't control these corporations with net neutrality, why is it needed?
If they've been limiting your net searches already, what are you afraid of?

Oh... that's right, everything must be over regulated... because regulation works soooo well.

I mean I understand where you're coming from but in the not too distant future, all those things you talked about will be obsolete. There won't be checkbooks. Banks create your account using the internet. Applications will be strictly online and not handing in a piece of paper.

Although the whole "Life exists beyond your screen" mantra is nice, it's not the way its going to be. Everything is going to be done by computers, the internet and machines soon.

"Bunch of sissies"? You're better than that (or maybe you're not) but just because the future is going to be different than when you grew up, it doesn't make it bad. "Color TV! Back in my day, we only had the radio. Kids today are so soft." See how that works?

This same [BLEEP] has been said since the day the internet was introduced to the world...

While I agree that the vast majority of day to day tasks will be done over the internet by most people, there will always be old school banking, bill paying by USPS with a check, looking for a job by actually visiting places such as the state's employment job service, looking for a new vehicle, and all that stuff...

The internet is not a survival mechanism or a live or die "utility" it does make things easier and faster, but many people don't like doing things online...There are tons of people who resist bill paying online, online banking, and online anything and there always will be...

If the ISPs start charging for entertainment packages in order to listen to music or youtube, or social media, some large corporation such as google or facebook will create their own ISP without such fees and start getting customers from companies who do that...

Who owns the internet? Who controls the internet? If you don't like one ISP [BLEEP] can it and get another...

This isn't an end of life as we know it thing

---

As I've stated previously in this thread, the people who stream content seem to be the ones most upset with the NN situation. As a functional tool, NN will make no difference in my internet use because I stream very little. However, the ones who watch hours of shows every week will be targeted because they use the bulk of the bandwidth. So the question comes down to if ISPs are allowed to throttle or charge more for those who use internet resources more than others. If we were talking about water with a finite delivery capacity, shouldn't customers who use far larger amounts be limited or charged more? Is my analogy wrong?

Netflix is just the most prominent of the cases in this debacle but without Net Neutrality the ISPs can directly control every thing you view on the internet, whether you like it or not. For example, Comcast can make a deal with Yahoo to allow their search engine to be accessed without limits while Google is reduced to essentially dial-up speeds. The same can happen for your bank, your preferred source of news or even sites like pornhub. Do you really want to be in a situation where Comcast or Verizon get to dictate the fact that the only acceptable source of news is CNN or MSNBC or the Huffington Post?

---

As I've stated previously in this thread, the people who stream content seem to be the ones most upset with the NN situation. As a functional tool, NN will make no difference in my internet use because I stream very little. However, the ones who watch hours of shows every week will be targeted because they use the bulk of the bandwidth. So the question comes down to if ISPs are allowed to throttle or charge more for those who use internet resources more than others. If we were talking about water with a finite delivery capacity, shouldn't customers who use far larger amounts be limited or charged more? Is my analogy wrong?

Netflix is just the most prominent of the cases in this debacle but without Net Neutrality the ISPs can directly control every thing you view on the internet, whether you like it or not. For example, Comcast can make a deal with Yahoo to allow their search engine to be accessed without limits while Google is reduced to essentially dial-up speeds. The same can happen for your bank, your preferred source of news or even sites like pornhub. Do you really want to be in a situation where Comcast or Verizon get to dictate the fact that the only acceptable source of news is CNN or MSNBC or the Huffington Post?

That sounds like a bunch of hyperbolized hand wringing. In theory it could happen, but so could a visit by space aliens. In reality an ISP would be digging its own grave if it took such egregious measures. ISPs make their money by delivering what customers want, not by denying them in order to promote some nebulous sociopolitical agenda. The free market will dictate what they provide, not the big mean Koch brothers ruling from some evil dark ISP command center.

---

Netflix is just the most prominent of the cases in this debacle but without Net Neutrality the ISPs can directly control every thing you view on the internet, whether you like it or not. For example, Comcast can make a deal with Yahoo to allow their search engine to be accessed without limits while Google is reduced to essentially dial-up speeds. The same can happen for your bank, your preferred source of news or even sites like pornhub. Do you really want to be in a situation where Comcast or Verizon get to dictate the fact that the only acceptable source of news is CNN or MSNBC or the Huffington Post?

That sounds like a bunch of hyperbolized hand wringing. In theory it could happen, but so could a visit by space aliens. In reality an ISP would be digging its own grave if it took such egregious measures. ISPs make their money by delivering what customers want, not by denying them in order to promote some nebulous sociopolitical agenda. The free market will dictate what they provide, not the big mean Koch brothers ruling from some evil dark ISP command center.

Just because it's unlikely doesn't mean it's acceptable. If you could make atomic weapons disappear from the world with the snap of your fingers would you really decline the opportunity just because it seems unlikely that any country would actually use their ability to deploy said weapons? Control of the internet translates into a vast amount of power to whomever has said control, and though the federal government is not the perfect entity to wield this power it is a far better alternative to having the likes of Comcast and Verizon control that power.

---

That sounds like a bunch of hyperbolized hand wringing. In theory it could happen, but so could a visit by space aliens. In reality an ISP would be digging its own grave if it took such egregious measures. ISPs make their money by delivering what customers want, not by denying them in order to promote some nebulous sociopolitical agenda. The free market will dictate what they provide, not the big mean Koch brothers ruling from some evil dark ISP command center.

Just because it's unlikely doesn't mean it's acceptable. If you could make atomic weapons disappear from the world with the snap of your fingers would you really decline the opportunity just because it seems unlikely that any country would actually use their ability to deploy said weapons? Control of the internet translates into a vast amount of power to whomever has said control, and though the federal government is not the perfect entity to wield this power it is a far better alternative to having the likes of Comcast and Verizon control that power.

Comparing the irreversible destruction of mankind to the anticipated correction of censorial trends by market demands hardly reinforces your argument, but I get your point. However, ask CNN, MSNBC, and Huffington Post what pushing an obvious bias did to their market shares (and for the subsequent advent of alternate news sources) and you'll clearly see the free market is very effective at maintaining freedom and availability of content.

---