Re: OT: keep the internet free

You're wrong. Netflix is also paying them. You're not paying to 50Mb continuous bandwidth. Try running a web server on your connection.

You don't know that. Any rational business would. Their infrastructure has to be paid for somehow, even if they're the ones using it.

No, they're delivering a connection. They're not in the business of subsiding Netflix.

No, the content providers will be paying them all, likely based on how many people use it (bandwidth). TANSTAAFL.

...and the FCC chairman works for?

I know, you'd much prefer Obama picked winners an losers. Sorry,

*YOU* are the loser.

et

Tom's right, that's the whole game. The rest is chaff.

They want to apply the telephone 'universal service' 16.1% tax to internet comms,

and control content. If I understood Commissioner Pai correctly, the propo sed rule earmarks a lot of the new revenue for supporting certain political 'non-profits' (guess which). A twin FEC rulemaking is in progress too--if you post a political YouTube, the FEC wants to regulate it^H^Hyou.

Cheers, James Arthur

The FCC is supposed to be apolitical and wholly independent, regulating based on their apolitical judgement. Commissioner Pai said they got a wishlist from Mr. O not too long ago, and the new you-can't-see-it-until-we-pass-it rule is pretty well verbatim.

Cheers, James Arthur

He's got a truth-deficit too. "The Congress gave the FCC broad authority to update its rules to reflect changes in technology and marketplace behavior in a way that protects consumers."

The courts have twice held he has no such authority. Congress has that power. His job is to enforce their will.

Too many bureaucrats, making up laws...

Cheers, James Arthur

Then what exactly *is* Comcast being paid for?

Really? They never told me I wasn't allowed to stream.

That is where you are confused. You think that because Comcast found another teat to squeeze milk from, they somehow are cheated if that teat is taken away from them or it drys up. It's not their teat!

I can stream from a million different web sites but only a very few get "preferential" access meaning they have to pay. Comcast isn't going to try to make every web content provider pay, just the big milky ones.

Yes, I seem to recall that came out during the elections. Obama wants to kill the Internet. DOA!

I guess I can go back to playing minesweeper and balancing my checkbook on my PC.

--

Rick

te:

ent?

g winners and losers.

My actual preference is for TRUE COMPETITION to pick winners and losers, (N ot Obama, not the FCC, and believe what you want.. not overly burdensome re gulation!). That said, history teaches us otherwise, and we would be FOOLS to trust that big business will have OUR best interests at heart.

To your comment about who the FCC's Chairman Wheeler "works for".. You say "Obama", which I get because you have a little bit of an anti-Obama Republican/Tea Party bent (and that's OK). But, I think a better answer i s the SAME FOLKS THE FCC IS SUPPOSED TO REGULATE! The funding for the FCC mostly comes from fees on your cell phone bill, collected by the carriers. I'm trying to think of other sitautions like that - I suppose automated to ll roads comes close, but would have to think more about that.

Still, I agree with your overall sentiments that WHATEVER happens here, the players involved will problably screw it up!

:

rote:

vment?

ing winners and losers.

(Not Obama, not the FCC, and believe what you want.. not overly burdensome regulation!). That said, history teaches us otherwise, and we would be FOO LS to trust that big business will have OUR best interests at heart.

ma Republican/Tea Party bent (and that's OK).

They're all appointed by the President.

GULATE! The funding for the FCC mostly comes from fees on your cell phone bill, collected by the carriers. I'm trying to think of other sitautions l ike that - I suppose automated toll roads comes close, but would have to th ink more about that.

he players involved will problably screw it up!

A 16%, for starters, makes everything better.

Cheers, James Arthur

so the bottom line is we have big government fighting with big coorperation about how and who is going to get to screw the average joe. (new fees vs new taxes)

and now they have us fighting amongst ourselves about how we should be screwed.

what is wrong with this picture

Mark

I don't see any problem with providers providing a premium service for a premium price. It costs more. But they should advertise honestly, and deliver whatever you paid for.

I recently doubled from 1.5MBPS to 3.0MBPS, can't tell a scintilla of difference except downloading.

I wouldn't want to pay for 3.0MBPS continuous-rated service. I don't need it.

But whatever we do, let's add 16% tax--that way it's more affordable. (And Uncle can tell people what they may and may not provide, etc.)

Cheers, James Arthur

Congress, as I understand it.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com 
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

No, the executive branch. Obama. The commission is chaired by five members appointed by the president. Currently, three are democraps and two are republicans. The chair is a democrap.

Web browsing, email, and whatever it is you do here. Their model does

*not* include streaming. In fact, if you check their TOS, I'll bet that you're not even allowed to have a server.

You don't need to prove that you're an idiot. We got it (long ago).

Wrong. Netflix is causing them to spend money on their infrastructure. That money has to come from somewhere (I bet you'd rather Obama paid it).

...and if they're big enough they will pay for that privilege, and soon.

He wasn't to kill all business but specifically, he doesn't like the freedom the Internet represents. He *will* try to regulate it out of business, as he is doing with so many others he thinks are evil.

That's certainly the most productive thing you do.

I don't disagree but that wasn't what was being discussed.

Tell it to our resident Obamaphiles.

So is the IRS. What's new?

e:

ternet

are

based on their apolitical judgement. Commissioner Pai said they got a wish list from Mr. O not too long ago, and the new you-can't-see-it-until-we-pas s-it rule is pretty well verbatim.

What's new? Why Bob, I just saved 15% on car insurance![1] No, wait, I *p aid*

16%, and it was for internet. Same same. ;-) [1] "I just saved 15% on car insurance!" --GEICO insurance commercials' tag line

Cheers, James Arthur

s

Having attended many meetings at the FCC (mostly WTB and Media Bureau, some EB), I can pretty much tell you that they mostly "work" for the industries they regulate (wink, wink), and/or Wall St., depending on which way the wi nd blows. Sometimes, these loyalties just happen to conincide with grass-r oot desires so the the FCC Public Affairs folks hype these initiatives to k eep the masses occupied while they screw us elsewhere.

On paper, they are part of the Commerce Dept, with the Commissioners appoin ted by the President. (Often times held over from the prior administration , even if the governing political party changes.) That said: These are pol itical appointees, so don't expect any of them to know even the slightest t hing about radio waves. The real work gets done below the 8th floor, so co mments to the effect that Obama has his hand up the FCC puppet-ass really m iss the mark.