Thnx MAGA! Another victory for consumers right? Now they can slow/block ANYTHING instead of being content neutral! pay-for-play, what could go wrong?

[DrPepper12]

WHY DOES MAGA HATE REGULATION, EXPERTISE & CONSUMER PROTECTION?

A federal appeals court struck down the FCC’s established, landmark net neutrality rules ending a nearly two-decade effort to regulate broadband internet providers like utilities.

The US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit said that the F. C. C. lacked the authority to reinstate rules that prevented broadband providers from slowing or blocking access to internet content. The decision put an end to the Biden administration’s hallmark tech policy, which had drawn impassioned support from consumer groups and tech giants like Google and fierce protests by telecommunications giants like Comcast and AT&T.

“Consumers across the country have told us again and again that they want an internet that is fast, open, and fair,” Jessica Rosenworcel, chairwoman of the F. C. C., said in a statement about the ruling. “With this decision, it is clear that Congress now needs to heed their call, take up the charge for net neutrality and put open internet principles in federal law.”

In its opinion, it pointed to the "Loper Bright" case that overturned a 1984 legal precedent that gave deference to government agencies on regulations.

The FCC had voted in April to RESTORE the net neutrality regulations Trump ended which EXPAND government oversight of broadband providers and aim to protect consumer access to the internet.

The regulations were 1st put in place under the Obama administration and are aimed at preventing internet service providers like Verizon or Comcast from throttling, blocking or degrading the delivery of services from competitors like Netflix and YouTube. The rules were repealed under President Trump, and they have proved to be a contentious partisan issue over the years while pitting tech giants against broadband providers.

A fair, transparent, neutral internet is optional, right? They'll have your best interests in mind, right? I'll never forgive the lot of you!

Broadband providers SHOULD ✅ be able to discriminate traffic they carry

Broadband providers SHOULD NOT 🚫 be able to discriminate traffic they carry

Here's my plan:

[WindAtMyBack]

Net neutrality is a horrible idea. The name itself is misleading. There are two sides; Internet service providers, and Internet content providers. Net neutrality takes one of those sides. There is nothing neutral about it.

A gallon of milk costs more than a half gallon of milk. Makes sense, right? Then why should someone who streams movies non-stop not pay more than someone who only checks email every now and then?

Net neutrality advocates think they are against big corporations. But both sides are big corporations, with the net neutrality side (content providers) becoming far larger and far more monopolistic than the service providers.

Companies like AT&T and others spent tremendous amounts of money and took on tremendous amount of debt building the Internet. But companies like Google freeloaded on others' investments. The builders of the Internet took on huge amounts of debt. Content providers pay as they go instead of taking on tremendous amounts of debt like the service providers did. Without the burden of debt, they grew like crazy and became overly powerful and monopolistic.

Why shouldn't companies treat those who use more bandwidth differently than those who use little? Charge more for the people who use more. Or throttle it. But knock off charging the same for one tablespoon of milk as for a gallon of milk.

I understand the idea of common carrier. But the Internet does NOT work the same way as other common carriers. Even if you treat it as a common carrier, that does not justify "net neutrality" as that term is used. "Net neutrality" is not in any way an integral part of a common carrier. "Net neutrality" is just a misleading name for wanting something for nothing. Gee, I wonder which side in politics wants something for nothing? Nothing but a bunch of freeloaders as usual.

[DrPepper12]

878 words to say... Nothing. Content neutrality is necessary no matter who built the pipes.

[WindAtMyBack]

You missed the point. Net neutrality is NOT neutral. There are two sides and net neutrality is taking one of those sides.

Who built the pipeline DOES matter. Because that is the other side. They are the ones who paid for it and they are the ones getting screwed with net neutrality.

Net neutrality is just more socialistic bullshit by people who want free stuff.

[DrPepper12]

We built the pipes! Us. Citizens. Taxpayers. Govt.

Why can you not recognize your own economic interests?

[WindAtMyBack]

You have no clue what you are talking about. Do some research.

[Anonymous]

It wasn't just MAGA's, it was all the independents and moderate democrats, that voted for Trump, not because they liked Trump, but hated Harris more. If Democrats had held a legit primary instead of rigging it for Biden who they forced out so Harris could take over, we wouldn't in this situation. To answer your question, Broadband providers needs to treat all traffic fairly, and to the people who say free market will take care of things and ISP's who discriminate will go out of business, fail to realize, in many areas ISP's have a monopoly so customers don't have the luxury of choosing another provider, which is why it's extremely important net neutrality remains in place.

[Caroline91]

Well that's not good news. If we could just get it established that the internet is just like any other public utility...

[Anonymous]

It was Bidens baby. Only reason they paid attention. Pathetic

[Anonymous]

The only thing more dangerous than private censorship is a single all powerful goverment having the power to tell every commutation platform what to do.

You can address such discriminatory behavior at the local utility level. Then the Local politicians that abuse their regulatory power to implement advantageous censorship would still have what they are trying to hide exposed elsewhere.

Put that power in the federal goverment worse still a largely unaccountable federal beucracy and there is no way to find out the truth and thus no way to hold the abuse of said power accountable.

[ImalwaysrightOK]

Are you really this retarded? The court struck down the bureaucratic agencies within the government from unilaterally making up regulations just like they did in West Virginia v EPA.

It's Congress job to make laws, to regulate, not unelected bureaucratic agencies.

[DrPepper12]

Soooooo you just proved my point that MAGA is at wAr with expertise, days and reality? Ok...

[seeyounexttuesday]

An internet company that throttles netflix will not survive in a free marketplace. Why are you terrified of freedom?

[Friendlybro79]

If they all throttle they can do whatever they want to make you take a more expensive plan that won't throttle. Not terrified of freedom. Terrified of corporations controlling us. Many conservatives fear socialism where the government runs and owns everything, to which I think is bad, but you all don't seem to mind corporations owning everything. How about freedom to be a big monopoly and then have no competition? Small government means more freedom right? For who? The rich pal not the avg person.

[seeyounexttuesday]

@Friendlybro79 there is competition.

[Friendlybro79]

If we don't regulate them they won't act in good faith. By law their fiduciary responsibility is to profit as much for their stakeholders, not worry about giving us a good deal. If you think regulations are bad then take away monopoly laws and price fixing and see how fast they either buy each other up or turn into an oligopoly that agree to all charge the same over inflated prices. In a sense you there's no competition and worse pricing. You can argue you can't trust the government but you certainly can't give free reign to corporations. It will and has been backfiring on avg Americans for a long time. Our politicians gave them huge tax cuts, and they still lay us off , take more profit for themselves and shareholders, no wage increase for us and prices soar.

[Friendlybro79]

Key point is regulations need to be fair too. With regulations they're still competition with rules so people like me and you don't get screwed. Regulations protect consumers and that's good. You don't have to agree but quality will go down and prices will go up because they don't care about those things and how it effects it's customers. They only care about the bottom line

[seeyounexttuesday]

@Friendlybro79 the large companies want regulations to keep smaller companies from competing. You haven’t figured this out, yet?

[Friendlybro79]

No I haven't because I don't agree with that in most cases.

[seeyounexttuesday]

@Friendlybro79 lol, you think amazon is in favor of a $20 min wage out of the kindness of their heart?

[DrPepper12]

God DAMN son!! You're misunderstanding of reality is ON POINT!!

[seeyounexttuesday]

Wait, you don’t understand that companies push for regulations to push out competitors? Please tell me you only taught kindergarten. You’re too stupid to educate children after that.

[Friendlybro79]

His name explains who he is. I'm not talking about regulatory capture or regulatory arbitrage. I'm talking about regulations that aren't designed by the corporation themselves. They can do this yes but that is a deflection to say all regulations are bad. We need to get money out of politics so we can design regulations that are fair for all. Keep is safe and from getting price gouged (as an ex) and son that companies can profit well. Corporations would love to make us indentured servants if they could lower our wages more they would.

[seeyounexttuesday]

@Friendlybro79 lol, what’s price gouging?

[Anonymous]

who's more obsessed with Trump and MAGA? you or OddBeMe?

[DrPepper12]

Prob Dim jr... He still thinks he hit a triple...

[Opinion Owner]

so you?

[exitseven]

I voted that they should be able to discriminate by accident. I really meant to pick the other one.

[Caroline91]

Well go back and try again! lol

[exitseven]

@Caroline91 the software does not allow it.

[Caroline91]

@exitseven I meant now... whoops... too late. But, seriously, you're saying there's no way to correct things on the ballot while voting? That's crazy. There should be a way to correct it if you make a mistake and need to change something. I didn't know you couldn't. I've been voting by mail the past couple of elections.

[lightbulb27]

can you believe there was a time we survived without the internet at all? Is there no life without internet anymore?

[DrPepper12]

Not
The
Point
Or
Question.

Should it be content neutral or not boomer?

[lightbulb27]

I'll reserve opinion on this one.

[Anonymous]

Umm... Maga's not in charge right now, Biden is.

[Caroline91]

That's a good point. The only thing to be aware of is that while Maga might not be running the federal legislature yet, the slew of judges Trump appointed to the courts during his first term are currently affecting the judicial system, and will be for the next several decades. And it is the judicial system that made this decision, not the legislature.

[DrPepper12]

Holy fuck. Are you even semi literate?

[KrakenAttackin]

You over simplify, sir.