Kanzen is always right Spam

GET. OUT.







:P

So yeah, say good bye to the internet. Well as we know it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/technology/fcc-new-net-neutrality-rules.html

Quote:

Originally posted by Kanzen

>Eberlestock J79 Skycrane 2, in Coyote.
> color selected is Dry Earth
> clicks Coyote Brown
> [Image]

I prefer the Military Green

Quote:

Originally posted by Kanzen

So yeah, say good bye to the internet. Well as we know it.

[Link]

Well, shit. Just like music, movies and television, the companies with the most money to push their product will force-feed their product onto the marketplace. This is why popular music is popular and blockbuster movies are blockbusters and why piece of crap network TV shows are the most watched television shows.

My quote button is broken, apparently.

But also, don't worry Davey. That's just culture being culture. :P

Quote:

Originally posted by Davey45

...

Well, shit. Just like music, movies and television, the companies with the most money to push their product will force-feed their product onto the marketplace. This is why popular music is popular and blockbuster movies are blockbusters and why piece of crap network TV shows are the most watched television shows.

I guess I really don't see the big deal...or maybe the whole picture.

If Netflix wants to pay to offer a faster service to their customers, and their customers are willing to pay for it...then whats the problem? If their customers aren't willing to pay for it...(and there will be lot that don't, as there are more people today not signed up with Netflix than are signed up.) then they can use a different service.

You use network tv as an example, and while I agree that the 4 networks for the most part have the most watched programs, shows like AMC's The Walking Dead have snuck into the top 10 most watched shows on tv. And if you look at the list of the top 25 shows of the 2012 -2013 season I don't see too many that would be considered crap. Granted, just because they aren't in the top 25, doesn't mean that they aren't successful.

More important yet though, is how this relates to faster internet for some companies. So because ABC has a faster service than HBO, their shows will be more watched? I don't see the connection. Also...their shows are already more watched, and with the odd exception like The Walking Dead or The Sopranos, they've always been more watched, due to the simple fact that cable tv doesn't reach as many people.

Like I said, maybe I'm missing something, but I don't really see the problem.

Quote:

Originally posted by Bangledesh

. That's just culture being culture. :P

Oh, did I say that I'm having a pedicure today ?

Wonder what music they will be playing ?

Smooth Jazz, and Easy Listening.

Quote:

Originally posted by SP

I guess I really don't see the big deal...or maybe the whole picture.

Yeesh, did you read the comments from the Times, or Ars, or Hacker News, or any of the other sites?

ISPs are making record profits, refusing to upgrade their infrastructure, and now double-dipping all while telling people it is cool.

Here is a quick rundown in video form, while not perfect, they do give you a very solid primer on the situation:

[youtube]37nfG8m0XzQ[/youtube]

[youtube]WIOcbclh370[/youtube]

Quote:

Originally posted by SP

If Netflix wants to pay to offer a faster service to their customers, and their customers are willing to pay for it...then whats the problem?

They don't want to pay, they are paying for the moment because Comcast is extorting them to. And guess what, those raising prices are inbound for the customers.

Comcast doesn't have any real competition because they have bought out politicians, and small ISPs and folding them into themselves while steadily raising the price and worsening the quality of service. Now Comcast, who has already had record levels of pure profit while refusing to upgrade their infrastructure or improving their service. There aren't any real alternatives, AT&T is a joke and has been throttling even worse than Comcast but since their customer-base is smaller, Netflix went to address Comcast first. Right now, trying to watch anything above 480P on AT&T here, is impossible unless you use a VPN to get around their traffic shaping.

Comcast is double dipping and now the rest of the ISPs want in on it too. Verizon is trying to talk their way into a toll system with Netflix too. Comcast swears up and down that Netflix is saturating their bandwidth and that they don't have the ability to keep up, despite the fact that it is the Tier 1 are the ones handling the data across the internet. Comcast, Time Warner, Verizon, etc. are Tier 3, they are the last mile. Netflix has offered all of those ISPs caching hardware that would virtually eliminate all congestion and make things multitudes faster. All of them with the exception of Sonic Net (which is local to California only) has accepted it.

http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/03/netflix-got-a-bit-faster-on-comcast-after-opening-its-wallet/
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/04/after-netflix-pays-comcast-speeds-improve-65/
http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/04/netflix-still-sucks-on-att-and-now-att-plans-to-offer-netflix-clone/
http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/04/netflix-plans-price-hike-for-its-subscription-plans/
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/02/netflix-packets-being-dropped-every-day-because-verizon-wants-more-money/

Quote:

Originally posted by SP

If their customers aren't willing to pay for it...(and there will be lot that don't, as there are more people today not signed up with Netflix than are signed up.) then they can use a different service.

What service? Name a service, name a single service that can actually compare that isn't Amazon Prime (which is also having to raise it's prices now because of this bullshit). No start-up can compete because they don't have enough money to pay the ISPs to not throttle their stuff. So who is going to buy into that and bring up capital so they can? Well it won't be possible because people aren't going to band behind a service that is technically worse and has less capacity to buy it's way in.

Quote:

Originally posted by SP

You use network tv as an example, and while I agree that the 4 networks for the most part have the most watched programs, shows like AMC's The Walking Dead have snuck into the top 10 most watched shows on tv. And if you look at the list of the top 25 shows of the 2012 -2013 season I don't see too many that would be considered crap. Granted, just because they aren't in the top 25, doesn't mean that they aren't successful.

This is exactly what is wrong with this. ISPs want the same amount of tight control over the internet like if it was TV. It will become a pay-to-play system where only the mega rich companies can have access. The internet will become a two-tier system one for the rich and one for the poor. Say you want to start up a web service, how well do you think you would fare now that not only do you have to pay for your server hosting but now you have to pay every ISP in the nation so that they actually get a decent connection or a connection even at all. Do you think you will survive?

Quote:

Originally posted by SP

More important yet though, is how this relates to faster internet for some companies. So because ABC has a faster service than HBO, their shows will be more watched? I don't see the connection. Also...their shows are already more watched, and with the odd exception like The Walking Dead or The Sopranos, they've always been more watched, due to the simple fact that cable tv doesn't reach as many people.

This is incredibly flawed reasoning. You are tiering off the Internet into two systems that will give preference to the mega corporations and stifle outside competition and start-ups. The issue is they will cripple non-paying parties unusuable. Imagine trying to watch something on YouTube and it pauses and buffers every three seconds and it runs at 360p and no higher. Are you going to be a happy customer? Are you going to be a happy content producer?

Quote:

Originally posted by SP

Like I said, maybe I'm missing something, but I don't really see the problem.

You're missing a lot.

I should clarify, right now I am on AT&T U-Verse, I am paying $51 a month for a 12Mbps/1Mbps connection and without the use of a VPN I cannot even watch anything on Netflix, YouTube, or TDS, CR without the use of a VPN, and the throughput on those videos is under 3Mbps. Tell me that letting these people to continue what they are doing is going to be okay.

These ISP assholes are going to divy up the internet and soon you will have no choice and you will have to buy bundles just to use portions of the internet.

^ If I could I would un-awsome that about 10 times.

Quote:

Originally posted by hydrahead

^ If I could I would un-awsome that about 10 times.

Awesome it. And then it gives you the option to "unawesome" it. So just do that.

Thanks for taking the time to explain all of that.

Quote:

Originally posted by Kanzen

They don't want to pay, they are paying for the moment because Comcast is extorting them to. And guess what, those raising prices are inbound for the customers.

Well...to be fair, nobody wants to pay for anything, but thats not the sole reason people are subscribing to Netflix, and you know it. They offer a good service for a price that people feel is adequate. End of story.

Quote:

Originally posted by Kanzen

What service? Name a service, name a single service that can actually compare that isn't Amazon Prime (which is also having to raise it's prices now because of this bullshit).

Hulu, Couchtuner, Tubeplus, alluc to name a few.

*I will admit that I don't get Hulu in Canada, but its my understanding that you are able to watch older tv episodes (a limited number) for free.

Quote:

Originally posted by Kanzen

This is incredibly flawed reasoning. You are tiering off the Internet into two systems that will give preference to the mega corporations and stifle outside competition and start-ups. The issue is they will cripple non-paying parties unusuable. Imagine trying to watch something on YouTube and it pauses and buffers every three seconds and it runs at 360p and no higher. Are you going to be a happy customer? Are you going to be a happy content producer?

I'm not sure how start ups would be stifled either, if what you're saying is true, that there will a two tiered internet (like there already is in television) then there will still be plenty of customers for startups to go after. The article didn't say anything about slowing the speeds of existing sites down, it talked about how some sites would potentially buy a faster more expensive service and pass that expense on to their customers. Maybe I'm wrong, but thats not what the article said anyway.

Quote:

Originally posted by Kanzen

You're missing a lot.

You really don't need to talk to me like I'm a 10 year old, the condescending tone really isn't appreciated.

Quote:

Originally posted by Kanzen

I should clarify, right now I am on AT&T U-Verse, I am paying $51 a month for a 12Mbps/1Mbps connection and without the use of a VPN I cannot even watch anything on Netflix, YouTube, or TDS, CR

You're saying that without a VPN, you can't watch a video on youtube? Why?

Are you saying that you physically can not access the youtube site because you don't pay a package that allows it?

Isn't this just a variation of the move from a commodity service to a proprietary one ? That's the way I see it and it is inevitable isn't it SP and Kanzen ? If that is the correct analogy it is something that all industries have and all companies strive for.

And natch, the consumer's lose.

My personal opinion is that we are gonna get screwed.....

I'm sure that some services are going to go up, and that sucks, but I have a hard time buying into the whole doom and gloom thing. If there is enough money in something, someone is always going to come along and offer a competitive service. The future of broadcasting is online, people don't want to be tied to a network schedule, they want to watch what they want, when they want it. In coming years there is going to be a massive market for online digital content, and there will be more choice than ever for consumers. Netflix is producing their own content, so is Amazon, and Netflix is even beginning to air episodes of some programs the same time as they come out on the network, rather than their usual full season at one time release. I think in the future we're going to be paying for a few online subscription services rather than cable. What remains to be seen is how much we pay, but I'd prefer pay for 4-5 netflix type subscriptions at $8/mo rather than the $70/mo I pay for cable.

Quote:

Originally posted by SP

Well...to be fair, nobody wants to pay for anything, but thats not the sole reason people are subscribing to Netflix, and you know it. They offer a good service for a price that people feel is adequate. End of story.

So you think double-dipping is okay then? You don't see anything wrong with a market place that is run entirely by the big players who have no competition and can force any one that wants to try to pay out massive amounts of money to even have a chance to enter said market. But then, due to the operational costs cannot compete and will ultimately be crushed within a matter of time?

Imagine if WBW was like that, imagine if WBW was the only porn site there was on the entire internet and you had to pay to see uploaded content. But the only way you could see certain content, let's say a Lesbians Gallery, well guess what you have to cough up another $5 per month for that gallery on top of that $49.99 per month price. But what's this, a particular contributor who you absolutely adore for finding the absolute premium woman on woman action has decided he can't pay WBW any more money to make his stuff available to others to view. Suddenly it is gone and you don't have access anymore. And because WBW is the only pornsite on the internet, you don't have a replacement/alternative.

Does that seem fair to you? Now expand the scope, and that is what the internet is going to be.

Back in 1997, here in Detroit (specifically around Wayne State Campus) there were the following options for internet service providers: America Online, Earthlink, WSU Connect, SonicNet (different one from the one in CA), Boom.Net, Ameritech (SBC->AT&T), Bell ISP (now Verizon), and Qwest. All of them were cheaper and they were always fighting for our money, not a week went by where we didn't have at least two of their promotional advertisements in our mailbox. We were paying $14.99 a month for unlimited internet access at 56K-baud.

The first two to leave our area were Boom.Net and Qwest, about three or four months later all across the board with the exception of AOL and Earthlink everyone was at $19.99. Well that lasted for about a year and then in 1998, SonicNet, left our area after rolling out 256KB DSL for a brief moment. Suddenly AOL and Earthlink went to $20 a month just like the others (Ameritech, Bell, Boom.net, and WSU Connect.) Then at the end of 2000, all of them were at $24.99 a month for the same service, the same speed. AOL was bombarding our mailbox wit their shitty CDs.

2001 rolls around, Comcast buys out AT&T's ISP and switches it all over to DOCSIS systems (Cable), they are offering 1Mb/s service for $79.99 a month with contract for two years. You back out of the contract, prepare to cough up $700 on the spot or they bill you with interest until you do pay. AT&T bows out of the ISP ring for a while until about 2003. They roll out 768KB/s DSL for $49.99 a month with contract. AOL bows out entirely, and Earthlink is out of business. The others are gone as well.

Now it is 2014, and we only have two options in the entirety of Detroit, AT&T and Xfinity (Comcast rebranded). Both with sky high prices, poor service, throttled access, and no competition to put them in their place. Both companies which have been absorbing outside businesses and building themselves back into the massive behemoths they were before the breakdown in 1984. Right now Comcast (which wasn't part of that) is in the process of buying out their biggest competitor Time Warner. Comcast has the largest cable customer base and Time Warner the second. They will effectively become the largest ISP on the planet with the most power and sway against customer's wants and needs.

Quote:

Originally posted by SP

Hulu, Couchtuner, Tubeplus, alluc to name a few.

Hulu is close but it does not offer the catalog or the capacity of Netflix, on top of that Hulu Plus is a blatant rip-off, you pay them for access to the older catalog that isn't free and they still play unskippable ads before everything. I will give you Hulu as a win, but do you think their prices are going to stay low when Netflix's price is rising? Hulu is going to raise their price in a brief moment too.

TubePlus and Alluc are two pirate sites that are going to be squashed in a moment because with the FCC's new requirements, all the ISPs can stick them at the bottom of the bandwidth barrel. All they have to do is block a handful of sockets and both of those are gone and they have no legal recourse because they are illegal to begin with.

Quote:

Originally posted by SP

*I will admit that I don't get Hulu in Canada, but its my understanding that you are able to watch older tv episodes (a limited number) for free.

Actually the free stuff is limited to a small selection of already syndicated television, everything else you have to pay for and on top of that, after you pay you still have to sit through ads.

Quote:

Originally posted by SP

I'm not sure how start ups would be stifled either,

How would they not be stifled when they have to cut their slim profit margins just to stay somewhat operational? When they don't have the money to pay for a service that can be usable to their customers? This isn't the ISPs just giving the big players more bandwidth for a cost, they are going to throttle everyone else to make them pay or their sites will be unusuable.

Quote:

Originally posted by SP

if what you're saying is true, that there will a two tiered internet (like there already is in television) then there will still be plenty of customers for startups to go after.

Okay, so you are telling me that there will be tons of people that will go sign up for say SugarFlix, sure they will have to pay $24.99 a month and there are only about 50 movies available from the catalogue and video is maxed out at 360p? Are you going to say that is a viable method of operation for a start-up? Do you think anyone in their right mind is going to say, "Yeah, I want that. I'm going to pay more for less."

Quote:

Originally posted by SP

The article didn't say anything about slowing the speeds of existing sites down, it talked about how some sites would potentially buy a faster more expensive service and pass that expense on to their customers. Maybe I'm wrong, but thats not what the article said anyway.

But that is what they are doing already. Did you read the links I posted from Ars? Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T have been slowing down Netflix traffic to make Netflix pay. Time Warner already does this with YouTube. Do you think they aren't going to try and milk this as much as possible for maximum profit? These assholes are gutting the internet from it's core to make it another broadcast medium for themselves and themselves alone. Do you think Dizzy would be able to pay off Comcast and AT&T to keep WBW functional in America?

Quote:

Originally posted by SP

You really don't need to talk to me like I'm a 10 year old, the condescending tone really isn't appreciated.

I apologize, but your stance is infuriating because of how absolutely backwards it is about the subject. You are taking the site of mega-corporations, and saying it seems fair that they get to gouge everyone just so they can put themselves in more power.

Quote:

Originally posted by SP

You're saying that without a VPN, you can't watch a video on youtube? Why?

Because they are shaping and throttling all traffic that they don't produce, they have been doing this for years. If I turn off my VPN when trying to view video it stops. Everything is unwatchable, video plays for three seconds and stops and I have to wait up to fifty-seconds for it to play another three seconds of video. They are crippling competition because they want more money.

If I turn on my VPN access (which I have to pay for separately, and adds to latency) I get the full bandwidth I pay AT&T for (1.3MB/s down), and if I turn off my VPN I get about 23KB/s from YouTube, TDS, CR, or Netflix. Nothing is usable, streaming is unusable.

Quote:

Originally posted by SP

Are you saying that you physically can not access the youtube site because you don't pay a package that allows it?

That is exactly what is wrong with this, there shouldn't be a package deal for this bullshit. If I am paying them $51 a month, I shouldn't be nickeled and dimed by them to use that so called "Internet" that they provide me with.


////

Quote:

Originally posted by F1098

Isn't this just a variation of the move from a commodity service to a proprietary one?

Well, ideally Internet Access should be a fundamental right since it is required to function as effectively as one does. It should be treated as a utility just like water and electricity. By stripping people of the service you are cutting off communication and knowledge resources. A lot of employers these days require online forms to be filled out for employment. Stuff that has become infinitely easier to do is because of our connectivity.

Quote:

Originally posted by F1098

That's the way I see it and it is inevitable isn't it SP and Kanzen?

All the FCC has do do is stop being the bitch of the ISPs and define them as a utility as they were told to do by every single consumer action group in the US. That is all they have to do is classify them as a common carrier and all this shit would be done with. All they would have to say is, "You cannot manipulate or shape any packet transfer." Boom, Net Neutrality.

Quote:

Originally posted by F1098

If that is the correct analogy it is something that all industries have and all companies strive for.

The FCC is supposed to be there to protect us, but instead they are doing the bidding of the corporations. If the corporations get away with this, they will limit our scope of entertainment, knowledge, and expression. This will become a technological dictatorship where only what those handful of ultra rich corporations can decide what happens on the internet.

Quote:

Originally posted by F1098

And natch, the consumer's lose.

That and the fact that we, the tax payers, paid for the connectivity, the technology, and the engineering of the internet. DARPA and colleges with government funds built the internet what it is today, and now the corporations want to control all of it. This is even after they got trillions of dollars in tax breaks. We have been screwed.

I would suggest that everyone call their represenetives and sign the petition on Whitehouse.gov:

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/maintain-true-net-neutrality-protect-freedom-information-united-states/9sxxdBgy

I would also suggest everyone spreading the word.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/04/fccs-new-rules-could-threaten-net-neutrality

//// corrections, didn't realize I had left the placeholder text in the quotation flags. Thanks B.