http://www.huffingtonpost.com/timothy-karr/obama-fcc-caves-on-net-ne_b_799435.html

Quote:

Welcome to AT&T's Internet For the first time in history of telecommunications law the FCC has given its stamp of approval to online discrimination. Instead of a rule to protect Internet users' freedom to choose, the Commission has opened the door for broadband payola - letting phone and cable companies charge steep tolls to favor the content and services of a select group of corporate partners, relegating everyone else to the cyber-equivalent of a winding dirt road. Instead of protecting openness on wireless Internet devices like the iPhone and Droid, the Commission has exempted the mobile Internet from Net Neutrality protections. This move enshrines Verizon and AT&T as gatekeepers to the expanding world of mobile Internet access, allowing them to favor their own applications while blocking, degrading or de-prioritizing others.

I cannot believe this. I'm really fucking speechless. What the hell can we do about this?

I wonder what kind of impacts this'll have on their Common Carrier status.... hmm.

That article is over-polarised, but it cross validates. That's extremely, extremely distressing. If there's anything we can do, speak up. I'll be writing some letters today at least.

Maybe you're being just a bit hyperbolic? After all, isn't it only the mobile broadband part that doesn't have to abide by net neurtrality? Non phone-based web still has to be treated neutrally, which is arguably more important.

I'm not a fan of the proposal, because I do think that mobile web should be neutral just like the rest of it, and loopholes are generally not the friend of the consumer and citizen. But Obama (who didn't write the proposal) destroys net neutrality (it's still intact, just not on your phone) might be overstating things slightly.

I'm torn on the issue. In theory it could allow cheaper more efficient service depending on what sites you access and how much you use things, but it's definitely ripe for abuse.

I'd be willing to pay less per month if I couldn't go to facebook. [grin]

This would be a lot less of a problem if there were more providers, but most people in the US seem to only have one or two options for broadband internet.

Quote:

Original post by Khaiy Maybe you're being just a bit hyperbolic? After all, isn't it only the mobile broadband part that doesn't have to abide by net neurtrality? Non phone-based web still has to be treated neutrally, which is arguably more important.

AT&T Press Release, Dec, 2014: Due to rising costs of infrastructure we're announcing immediate closing of cable service. All current subscribers will be transferred to our 5G wireless network at no extra charge (different plan may apply).

Quote:

In theory it could allow cheaper more efficient service depending on what sites you access and how much you use things, but it's definitely ripe for abuse.

In theory the profit margins will skyrocket. In practice, they'll go out of the solar system.

Quote:

Original post by Grimunlock http://www.huffingtonpost.com/timothy-karr/obama-fcc-caves-on-net-ne_b_799435.html Quote: Welcome to AT&T's Internet For the first time in history of telecommunications law the FCC has given its stamp of approval to online discrimination. Instead of a rule to protect Internet users' freedom to choose, the Commission has opened the door for broadband payola - letting phone and cable companies charge steep tolls to favor the content and services of a select group of corporate partners, relegating everyone else to the cyber-equivalent of a winding dirt road. Instead of protecting openness on wireless Internet devices like the iPhone and Droid, the Commission has exempted the mobile Internet from Net Neutrality protections. This move enshrines Verizon and AT&T as gatekeepers to the expanding world of mobile Internet access, allowing them to favor their own applications while blocking, degrading or de-prioritizing others. I cannot believe this. I'm really fucking speechless. What the hell can we do about this?

Nothing I believe. If I'm not mistaken, a court ruled that the FCC couldn't keep ISPs from tiering bandwidth. (Though I'm pretty sure I'm confusing something)

I'm still not quite sure what it entails. I understand they could charge more or less depending on the packages you select, but does that completely prevent access to certain sites, or just allow higher bandwidth / more efficient routes to certain sites?

FCC 3 to 2 keeps net neutrality

So it seems, the 'Net is still alive. For now.

Quote:

Original post by tstrimp I'm still not quite sure what it entails. I understand they could charge more or less depending on the packages you select, but does that completely prevent access to certain sites, or just allow higher bandwidth / more efficient routes to certain sites?

It means:
- youtube is $1/GB
- ATTFunnies is free
- Facebook is $14.99/month
- ATTFriends is free
- Netflix is $3.99/video (network cost)
- ATTMovies is free

See the pattern?

Also, any packet that cannot be decoded and deep inspected is silently dropped.

Oh, yea... wikileaks.com... It's not our supported service, but feel free to visit FoxExclusives.com, free for two weeks.

Cool, maybe people will get off their crackberries once in a while...