Balthanos: Has anyone thought about what net neutrality is going to do to “citizen journalism”?
I think the main side effect they are going for is control over the news cycle through limiting and restricting sources.
People will now “lock in” to their “preferred” source since having multiple sources will require more money.
It would be easy to create an artificial internal internet just through price restrictions. You will eventually be served the same type of model as China except it’s enforced through capitalism.
the_real_apples: Check who owns CNN.
YoungUrbanFailure: [Sh*t is hard. You got to dig deep. ](https://www.google.nl/search?q=cnn+net+neutrality&oq=CNN+net+&aqs=chrome.3.69i57j0l3.4762j0j9&client=ms-android-verizon&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8) [Keep up them good sleuthing skills, boss! ](https://www.google.nl/search?client=ms-android-verizon&ei=GtQWWvCJN-zfgAbU3Z7QDA&sjs=4095&q=fox+news+net+neutrality&oq=Fox+&gs_l=mobile-gws-serp.1.1.0i67l2j0i46j46l2j0l2.134837.138923..139999…….225.1298.5j4j2…………mobile-gws-wiz-serp…..3..41.pNK%2BfL%2FPcY4%3D)
themeanbeaver: You still believe these “stage” players are seperate or divided? They are not! CNN is playing their role, so is Trump! Their masters are one and the same. This political saga reality you see before you is staged. Just for you.
the people will not succeed until they see and understand this apparatus is one.
LiterallyASupernova: You do know cnn is owned by time Warner right? And time Warner wants to end it.
tanmanlando: Because people that watch tv news tend to run older. Like in the 50’s. It’s a big deal to us but I haven’t seen many elderly people know about it or even care the same way the younger generations are
open_ur_mind: Net Neutrality is a non-partisan issue.
bigmaninthebigsand: CNN is owned by Turner Broadcasting, which is a major Telecom provider. Fox News is owned by News Corp and Rupert Murdoch. If you think an actual Telecom or a Corporatist news media would fan the flames of the outrage, you’re sorely mistaken.
The world doesn’t revolve around Trump.
machocamacho88: Because it benefits the status quo. It will allow them to better maintain the narrative easier, when your favorite alternative news website fails to load after 60 seconds.
Sugarblood83: The only MSM talking head I saw mentioning it was Rachel Maddow.
She even said something about Comcast probably won’t like what she’s about to say but…
Respect for her went up for about 30 seconds
jcaseys34: It’s the same as Netflix. I believe when this all started they came out and plainly said “This is bad for most consumers and companies, not so much for us. Forgive us for being mostly silent on this issue.” While I’d love for the big names to be more up in arms, they’re not gonna fight something that would end up beneficial to them.
SoyIsPeople: CNN has been covering it for the last 3 days.
We keep it on at work, and I see something on it at least once an hour.
jasenlee: CNN, by way of its parent company Time Warner, is trying to sell itself to AT&T right now. A number of huge assets that are part of the FOX empire are engaging in early discussions to sell themselves off to Verizon and Disney. None of those companies (*Verizon, AT&T or Disney*) are interested in anything resembling net neturality.
Stranger_From_101: Fox News ran a Facebook post and website article about it a few days ago. Other than that, I haven’t seen much on the news.
fuzzo: CNN is owned by TimeWarner. That’s why.
groman31: CNN and Fox, through their respective owners Time Warner and Newscorp, are not going to have any trouble negotiating traffic priority with ISP’s.
Arkfort: CNN wants NN so bad they are getting blue balls. Don’t fool yourself
BanMikePantsNow: Since CNN is run by Israel’s backers, it is safe to assume that campaign to repeal NN is another hasbara scheme to control the internet.
FlubberNutBuggy: Because NBC and comcast are teh same company? Verizon and AOL likewise? I dunno about the others, but they have a vested interest in keeping silent about it.
blueblazzer: Who owns CNN?
8_inch_throw_away: Because AT&T wants to merge with Time Warner?
TheGreatestUsername1: The higher ups in those new corp, will benefit from it or are doing it as a favor. You know how it is with rich folks, they stick together as best they can until it becomes a problem for their source of income.
mackeneasy: Telcos and traditional Media companies benefit massively by this. Probably a gag order on all of them.
CurseOfTheRedRiver: I’m completely unconcerned. With so many wireless options, I no longer care about the wired ones controlling things. The market will get a decent network, and it will be wireless if it needs to be.
onionknightpld: Use CNN’s hate for Trump to get us a win.
Max_Fenig: The simple answer is that it is against their interests. There doesn’t have to be a conspiracy when there is simple motive.
mm6748: Fox interviewed the FCC chair at length yesterday.
Tiger_Vet: I don’t trust the media or the government so we’re fucked either way on NN
bizmarxie: Did you guys know that Obamas NN rules defanged the FTCs ability to regulate anti competitive behavior? Removing title two will allow the FTC to do their job.
Something to think about.
Allinon72: Have you finally run out of MSM hit pieces to post? Don’t worry, more are likely coming.
gggddd333: Why do you want the government to be able to set prices in the isp market? Should they be able to make fed ex charge the same amount as the post office. Fed ex offers “priority” deliveries to customers that pay extra, isn’t that “predatory” to the people that can’t afford to send their packages overnight? Shouldn’t everyone have to use ground transportation and all pay the same price?
Well McDonalds is always trying something new to draw customers
U.S. taxpayers gave $400 Billion dollars to cable companies to provide the United States with Fiber Internet. We need to allow ISP’s to easily pop up and utilize the infrastructure we already paid for many times over.
Glag82: This is the real crime here. How old is the current system we are using? What did they do with the 400 Billion dollars? How would it (infrastructure) have been if that money was used as it was intended? Who made the decision to divert those funds and why? We keep putting band aid on the wounds, let’s find the thing that keep cutting us and stop it, no more band aids.
megalynn44: My city was one of the first to get fiber. We have some of the fastest internet in the country and it is through a public utility. Everyone loves the service. The utility has publicly expressed they have no intention of ever doing anything to tier out or throttle their service the way people fear Comcast will if net neutrality ends. The service is so popular they tried to expand to more parts of the state. Unfortunately our reps are bought by giant telecom and have suppressed the spread of cheaper, faster internet.
We actually have a discussion going in our city subreddit about how to get the message out to more people. We want net neutrality, and believe a great way to fight for it is to get this message out to people that there is in fact a way to have better internet. People should be demanding utility fiber across the country.
Strictly_Baked: Meanwhile I live less than 1 mile outside of town and the fastest internet I can get is 4mbps download with DSL unless i want to pay thousands to have spectrum dig lines to my house.
Breciu: Hey there! Fellow European here, heard about your fight with the FCC.
Just in case, god forbid, they will win. You should do what Romania did back in the days when our internet price was astronomicaly high in comparison with everything, not to mention our salaries.
It will be hard, it will take time, but in the end, they will die/lose.
If this will not help at all, I still consider it a nice niche lecture.
dsannes: But that’s how they make their money. Charging you over and over again for a thing you use. It’s like the rickety rides at the fair. It’s even worse in Canada. We haven’t had a real net neutrality battle in Canada yet. It’s time for a new Internet. I have a feeling I know what’s next and it frightens the crap out of the old system. So they revert to a scorched earth digital policy. Everyone warned us. But it’s still here.
toneii: Ahh. That explains it. About 7 or 8 years ago, they dug up the sidewalks to put fiber in, but never sold the service. To this day you are limited to Comcast for Internet, AT&T has 3MB dsl only.
ENDLESSBLOCKADEZ: This shit should be nationalized already
JustSomeButtStuff: [I was dubious of this number.](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7709556)
dd817: Let’s create a new internet like Hendricks
EchoRadius: Not to mention the basic infrastructure we’ve been paying for with phone bill taxes since forever. We built a megastructure and the companies wanna make us pay more to use OUR shit.
LiberalGeneral79: I have mentioned this and been downvoted, the number of large companies double dipping by buying the supply companies and artificially inflating costs so they can extort the tax payers is astounding. Why make a few hundred thousand honestly on fiber installs when you can jack up your own “cost” show almost no profit and then offshore the money through a shell company that then pays you IP and consulting fees?
F**k most ISP’s.
SoundOfDrums: We need to regulate it so that companies that own infrastructure cannot be direct providers. We have the same system for power in Texas.
postonrddt: Not only did they waste or not utilitize subsidized infrastructure they are over charging/not fixing the old infrastructure that the new would theoretically replace. Several of the baby bells started halting major repairs and upgrades to their copper wire cables in the 90s. It started with just transferring a damaged set of wires in to a new set never locating and repair the actual damage in a run/cable. Then in the 2000s they started hooking people up to voip/wifi not attempting to do anything with the copper. Now they are abandoning or ‘retiring’ the plant much of which was bought and paid for by Ma Bell herself. And yet the price of a pots line(plain old telephone service) has consistently increased approaching cable broad band territory. Is the billing department that expensive to run?
3asybeat: Wait…we paid for these companies’ infrastructure?!? The same few companies that have monopolized an entire country and overcharge customers because there is no competition??
Cuddels: Threats of enforcing the intended use of this money should be used as leverage by our legislators to keep net neutrality rolling.
__G_A_R_D_E_N_E_R__: False Claims act, Common Carrier, Fraud, Racketeering, and Profiteering, Sherman Anti-Trust Act, and Abolishment.
New-Alexandria is for Everyone.
forlorndreamer: Y’all should look up Sonic. We’re a local company from the Bay Area in California. We’re growing quickly and we give fiber to the home for 63 bucks a month. Offering people available 1000 mbs of speed upload and download. No speed tiers. No data caps. No speed throttling at peak hours. Our CEO is a local guy who believes in net neutrality. Plus they treat their employees really well. Some of us smaller guys are still good.
MereMemetics: Huff post owned by Verizon?
Deadlyaroma: “Richest” country on earth, but way behind in internet technology and Healthcare….
1992_: I have no home internet. These fucks quoted us $50,000 to run cable from about a mile up the road. The house is not even 20 years old. Fuck them.
FogFan: Whats this “GIVE” shit? I didn’t give them a damn thing. I didn’t get a choice. Whoever “THEY” were that “GAVE” them our money “SHOULD” stand the fuck up and make them do what they were given the money for in the first place. Stupid fucking morons.
IanP23: Jesus fucking Christ we’ve been screwed over. Royally. In just about every area of our lives…
Stratos_Hellsing: No consequence. What a weak nation we’ve become. Do something for gods sake.
rocker5969: read cringely from computerworld – they never built most of the fiber, and what little they did build is unusable.
mellowmonk: >U.S. taxpayers **paid for the Internet to be developed in the first place**
CoolHandLukeSkywalka: This is something everyone should be able to get behind and support in some way – unless of course you are some exec for Comcast (in which case you are already the lowest scum of the earth).
crazyguzz1: So many people on this sub suck Trump’s dick but ‘oh no, net neutrality’.
You kind of deserve this.
Sasuke082594: Vote with your wallets and let’s bring down the ISPs!
woefully_inept: THIS is the real fix. Not net neutrality.
stayfresh420: If this is something a lawyer can file a class action suit on now would be the time. If anyone heard anything make sure it gets known.
T4keTheShot: Liberals answer to every problem is to just throw tax payer money at it. The cable companies realize that they have no competition (largely because of receiving taxpayer money like this) and that as long as their service remains shit, liberals will continue to throw money at them. So they make sure it never improves, and keep receiving taxpayer money. The best thing to do would be to remove all regulation, and dont give them anymore money, and let smaller cable companies offer better services for less money. The big cable companies are trying to shoot themselves in the foot by changing the way they charge their customers to an extremely inconvenient way, and the FCC is trying to step in and tell them not to. I say let them shoot themselves in the foot and we can finally be rid of this monopoly on internet.
CaliforniaJuice: We’re working on it
SickOfIt518: The nation will never get FiOS if left up to the phone and cable companies.
TheRedsAreComing: I posted about this yesterday. Not even mad.
StupidisAStupidPosts: Canadian here. Our gov. Forced the telcos to lease their lines. I get 100 Mbps for 40 bucks a month unlimited.
TheRaisinWhy: for once a post on this subreddit i agree with the thing is though its not a conspiracy thinkingemoji
TooCovert: Last year Facebook tried to do the same in India with free basics but thankfully they weren’t allowed to do so.
supnul: Wont/Cant happen easily. There were no design requirements for these funds typically .. meaning.. implementation of the funds would have/should have dictated a method to allow common carrier sharing of last mile facilities. This worked in 96 with the telecom act because everyone used a centralized cabling methodology for copper mostly. There was no implied ‘system’ when it could have been clearly defined as ‘fiber to common carrier exchange point’. Expect another trillion to make that happen.
D14fun: all I know if Soros wants it it cant be good https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/joseph-rossell/2015/02/25/soros-ford-foundations-lavish-196-million-push-internet-regulations
shitINtheCANDYdish: Good stuff.
Sadly, **having the Internet under FCC control** (so called “Net Neutrality”) will do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to assist that end.
**If anything** such regulation is a complete resignation to this state of affairs, as Title II regulation is for monopolies.
Of course these ISPs are not quite monopolies (yet), nor is there any logistical argument for granting them such.
TL-DR: ‘Net Neutrality’ will do nothing to help ISP competition (the REAL cure all), and if anything will just centralize the palms that will need to be greased.
TheWandererwithQ: Dude I’m so sick of hearing all the time about how our government used our tax payers dollars! Whether you thinks taxes are to high or too low I think that everyone can agree the the bull crap of Washington waisting our money is out of control!! A politician that actually wants to put money back into the hands of ihis people! Find one of those I will sure give you some karma cause I seem to see a bunch of gangsters in suites!