Thoughtful, detailed coverage of the Mac, iPhone, and iPad, plus the TidBITS Content Network for Apple consultants.

FCC Votes to Abolish Net Neutrality

It should come as no surprise that Ajit Pai’s FCC has voted to eliminate Obama-era net neutrality rules that prevented Internet service providers from blocking, throttling, or prioritizing Internet traffic, among much else. At Ars Technica, Jon Brodkin outlines what happened, how we got here, and what comes next. Given the overwhelming and bipartisan support for net neutrality from most Americans, the FCC’s move will likely draw challenges both in the courts and in Congress.favicon follow link

 

Comments about FCC Votes to Abolish Net Neutrality

To leave a comment, click Add a Comment and then enter the text, your name, and your email address (which won't be displayed). Your comment will appear after you follow a link in the one-time confirmation message we send to verify that you're a real person.
Receive comments via RSS
Andrew Peterson  2018-01-07 20:06
Overwhelming bipartisan support from most Americans? Really? Don’t you mean most LIBERAL Americans? Or most LEFTIST Americans? Remember, too, that there’s nothing neutral about “Net Neutrality”. Obama’s edict sought to put the internet under government control. The government isn’t neutral. It’s leftist. It’s statist. And you know damn effing well -- or you should -- that such a state of affairs will lead, over time, to corruption, control, and censorship of those who oppose the government. Doesn’t that bother you? It should.
Reply
Curtis Wilcox  An apple icon for a Friend of TidBITS 2018-01-08 16:15
Adam should've left out the adjective "bipartisan," which makes the fact sound overtly political. It's not. The answer to your question is most Americans, regardless of party affiliation, agree with the principles of net neutrality when asked.

"Government control" sounds very ominous but a better way of describing it is regulation. Most Americans do not think Internet providers should get to decide which web sites you visit, which sites are fast or slow, or that providers should not extort money from those web sites to reach the providers' customers, as if we belong to them. Government regulation is the only thing that's can maybe prevent that from happening. The current FCC chair is a corporatist, not leaving choices to consumers or "the market" but to the large, entrenched corporations like Verizon and Comcast that control virtually everyone's Internet access.
Reply
Why would you want to prevent something that has not happened yet. Just because it could happen, does not mean it will. And if it does, there could be new technology that busts the monopoly. Regulating any industry out of concern about what could happen can destroy an industry and can adversely affect desired outcomes. People of say the U.S. was short-sided not to have mass transit. But the U.S. railroad was the most advanced on the world in the 1890s. But it was regulated out of existence by the net neutrality of there day; the interstate commerce commission.(ICC). Would you have regulated Kodak because they had a monopoly on film. What would that have done to the advent of digital photography? The fundamental of regulation is that when you do it, you get less of what you want, and it is more expensive. Prosecute anti-trade practices. Do not regulate!
Reply
Curtis Wilcox  An apple icon for a Friend of TidBITS 2018-01-16 08:00
But ISPs acting unfairly *has* already happened! The FCC spent a decade making rulings against ISPs for their bad actions only to lose in the courts because ISPs weren't categorized under Title II. So in 2015, the FCC categorized ISPs as Title II.

Most of the hyperventilating about Title II categorization being bad is about something that has not happened yet, that is, the FCC regulating ISPs not just to protect net neutrality but in all the other ways Title II categorization (like price controls).

I'm ignoring the rest of your comment because your facts are a mix of wrong and irrelevant.
Reply