Eff Comcast

[slakjaw]

Comcast is not big telco. They purchase transit from one of the bigger players. Net neutrality has been twisted into something it is not.

Ironic because if net neutrality goes away like the FCC is proposing, things like Apple TV and Netflix will be all but squashed by big telcos...

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Fine, "things like Apple TV and Netflix will be all but squashed by big telcos and the sleazebag companies like Comcast that monopolize the distribution of bandwidth".

Better?

[jyl]

"like the FCC is proposing"

What are you talking about? The FCC has repeatedly promulgated regulations requiring net neutrality and the cable companies and other companies have successfully challenged those regulations in court. The FCC is currently trying again to require net neutrality, but is hamstrung by the governing law and Congressional unwillingness to address the issue. Comcast is a huge corporate donor to Congressional elections. Thanks to the conservative wing of the Supreme Court, companies like Comcast can make political donations virtually without limit. Their customers fund their donations.

Ironic because if net neutrality goes away like the FCC is proposing, things like Apple TV and Netflix will be all but squashed by big telcos...

[slakjaw]

No. Educate yourself on this topic. Net neutrality people are making stuff up. I have no idea where this stuff is coming from everything will be exactly the same as it ever was. Bandwidth will be better managed. The kids next door using massive amounts of data for their torrents will still be able to do that but hopefully their torrents will no longer impact your netflix experiance. If torrents and UDP traffic gets throttled it's not even going to be noticeable. If you hate comcast so bad why don't you just go get DSL?

Seriously, where is all this disinformation coming from?

Fine, "things like Apple TV and Netflix will be all but squashed by big telcos and the sleazebag companies like Comcast that monopolize the distribution of bandwidth".



Better?

[jyl]

Google Fiber is supposed to come to Portland, although I don't know if they'll come to my neighborhood. I'd be very interested in trying that.

[slakjaw]

I will put fiber in the ground for any one of you guys. Average cost is 20 bucks a foot.

[intakexhaust]

ConEd, ConCast and all the others.... you do realize they have a license to steal and have full support by the local, state and fed gov.?!

Look at all the taxes piled on back of the utility and net/phone bills. And there's going to be a whole lot more piled on soon.

In the near future, will have to be a subscriber and pay for all Youtube and other video content.

[intakexhaust]

FCC will vote this week:

Mozilla Proposes Third Way On Net Neutrality - Forbes

[legion]

The FCC is pretending to back down from its controversial net neutrality plan

Federal Communications Commission chairman Tom Wheeler’s plan to let ISPs charge content providers more money to make sure that their traffic gets delivered more quickly is probably not the most popular idea. In fact, it’s not only provoked an outcry from pro-net neutrality advocates but has also led to protests from congressmen, major tech firms and venture capitalists who do a lot of work with tech startups. Because of this backlash, it seems that Wheeler is signaling an intention to back down: The Wall Street Journal reports that the FCC is “revising proposed rules for regulating broadband Internet, including offering assurances that the agency won’t allow companies to segregate Web traffic into fast and slow lanes.”

However, just because Wheeler is signaling an intention to back down, that doesn’t mean that he actually is. The Journal’s sources say that Wheeler’s newest plan “is sticking to the same basic approach but will include language that would make clear that the FCC will scrutinize the deals to make sure that the broadband providers don’t unfairly put non-paying companies’ content at a disadvantage.”

In other words, the new plan will still allow ISPs to strike deals with big players such as Google and Netflix to make sure that their content gets delivered on a fast lane while insisting that the FCC will have the right to make sure that these deals aren’t putting competitors at a disadvantage. Basically, this is the exact same endgame as the one in Wheeler’s original plan, only this time he’s decided to add some more language to assure us that the plan really isn’t supposed to do what he’s designed it to do.

These kinds of cosmetic changes that Wheeler will reportedly propose aren’t likely to quiet critics of the FCC’s plan, but it is interesting to see that he at least feels some need to pretend to cave to outside pressure.

[slakjaw]

In the near future, will have to be a subscriber and pay for all Youtube and other video content.

This is not true. I'm not sure why the net neutrality people are saying this. I guess to get people riled up. It is not true though.

[slakjaw]

It's pointless to try to tell people that they are reading BS when they are straight up foaming at the mouth with rage I guess.

[porsche4life]

No. Educate yourself on this topic. Net neutrality people are making stuff up. I have no idea where this stuff is coming from everything will be exactly the same as it ever was. Bandwidth will be better managed. The kids next door using massive amounts of data for their torrents will still be able to do that but hopefully their torrents will no longer impact your netflix experiance. If torrents and UDP traffic gets throttled it's not even going to be noticeable. If you hate comcast so bad why don't you just go get DSL?



Seriously, where is all this disinformation coming from?

Quote

Fine, "things like Apple TV and Netflix will be all but squashed by big telcos and the sleazebag companies like Comcast that monopolize the distribution of bandwidth".





Better?

Don't you work for Verizon? Talk about unbiased opinion...

[slakjaw]

No I don't work for Verizon. I do work for one of the big telcos though. Why does it matter? Because I work in the industry does not make me biased.

Why are you attacking me personally?

[MrScott]

Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc. all compete directly with the cable companies' cable offerings.
Why would they promote a competing product unless they were forced to?

Would Pelican ever show advertisements for a competing parts site?

In markets where there's only 1 choice, TWC (for example) could say "no more netflix for our subscribers" and it wouldn't much affect subscription rates; I won't give up internet access entirely because of one site.

In markets with competing providers they could do it more subtly: slow down Netflix traffic so it's less pleasant to use, or cap bandwidth so usage during peak times is difficult. Would you, as a consumer, know enough to determine the problem was with TWC and not Netflix? Would you schedule a "some time between 8am and 5pm" appointment with FIOS just to find out? Then maybe another when FIOS is even worse? All you'd know is: TWC's movie channels and pay-per-view always work well so it's safest to stick to that.

[intakexhaust]

I think its all a stream of piss.

[Brando]

They offer a competing service to neworks, but the cable co.s and telcos are not content providers. They provide the medium which you use to access the content. Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc. don't give you a wire straight from their company to you - then they would be offering a truly competing product.

Originally Posted by MrScott

Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc. all compete directly with the cable companies' cable offerings.
Why would they promote a competing product unless they were forced to?
[...]

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by MrScott

Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc. all compete directly with the cable companies' cable offerings.
Why would they promote a competing product unless they were forced to?

Would Pelican ever show advertisements for a competing parts site?

In markets where there's only 1 choice, TWC (for example) could say "no more netflix for our subscribers" and it wouldn't much affect subscription rates; I won't give up internet access entirely because of one site.

In markets with competing providers they could do it more subtly: slow down Netflix traffic so it's less pleasant to use, or cap bandwidth so usage during peak times is difficult. Would you, as a consumer, know enough to determine the problem was with TWC and not Netflix? Would you schedule a "some time between 8am and 5pm" appointment with FIOS just to find out? Then maybe another when FIOS is even worse? All you'd know is: TWC's movie channels and pay-per-view always work well so it's safest to stick to that.

as i type this Pelican is showing an add at the top for NAPA auto parts. If ISPs start doing what you have just said they will do, customers will leave in mass quantity. Netflix requires about ~5 Mbps for an HD stream. average download speed in the US is like 24 Mbps. Once again, they will not be throttling netflix. They do not care about netflix.

Maybe this whole net neutrality BS is just a distraction from the real issue of them wanting to keep content off of netflix and itunes entirely.

[MrScott]

Originally Posted by Brando

They offer a competing service to neworks, but the cable co.s and telcos are not content providers.

Regardless of who creates the content they benefit from providing it.

When I sign up for the "HBO package", TWC gets a cut.
Pay-per-view movie, TWC gets a cut.

Netflix, TWC gets no cut.
Amazon Prime, no cut.

Are they not going to favor the "cut" services over the "no cut" services?

[MrScott]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

as i type this Pelican is showing an add at the top for NAPA auto parts.

I specifically said competing. How many napa parts have you bought for your Porsche?

Originally Posted by slakjaw

If ISPs start doing what you have just said they will do, customers will leave in mass quantity.

In markets with single provider, who will they leave them for? If cable were a competitive market why do cable providers continue to rank near the bottom in customer satisfaction? Shouldn't these unhappy customers have already left or service improved due to competition?

Originally Posted by slakjaw

They do not care about netflix.

If a cable company doesn't care about maintaining control over content distribution they should fire the people in charge of caring.

[MrScott]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

Netflix requires about ~5 Mbps for an HD stream. average download speed in the US is like 24 Mbps. Once again, they will not be throttling netflix

To give you a concrete, current example: YouTube is consistently slower over my TWC connection than through other providers. While it's not simple throttling, it's a known issue with Time Warner caching YouTube content to reduce network load, the point is the same: providers can favor or punish sites and there's little consumers can do about it. And YouTube doesn't require 5Mbps.