US votes to scrap net neutrality

rietrot said:
Monopolies is a real problem, but this regulation didn't attempt to fix that.
Click to expand...

Yes, but how does it gel with your theory that if they decide what to prioritise, you can just change?

It doesn't, that's how.
 
rietrot said:
The ISP, because somehow they don't like myBB im useing telkom, then I'll just move.
Click to expand...

You have choice between comcast, comcast and comcast. Enjoy your options, freedom of choice is a great thing :D
 
Randhir said:
So amazing, much wow. That'll be R65 extra for accessing MyBB please.
Click to expand...

Strawman.

This whole only came about because of the bandwidth requirements that products like Netflix and Youtube demanded. It wouldn't make economic sense to charge separately for sites that use almost nothing.

You are forgetting how much competition exists in this space. Lets say MWeb decides that Mybb puts out too many anti-Naspers articles and puts a R65 fee on myBB. Well what MWeb has done is made Afrihost's product R65 cheaper to an Mweb consumer. As an informed consumer would you stick to Mweb or would you move ISP?

The real funny thing is companies like Facebook and Google, whilst being the good fighters of net-neutrality in the US, do exactly what ComCast did in the developing world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_Zero
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Free_Zone

CellC does a similar thing. They have R12 a month for 600mb of Whatsapp data. Which effectively allows you to have unlimited internet calling for R12 a month. Which if you look at it really offers fantastic value for money. BBM also did a similar thing and that allowed thousands of people to access mobile internet at a time when it was really expensive.

Even WISPS technically do this by offering access to internet banking services so you can buy their products, but restricting everything else. According to net neutrality rules, that is illegal.
 
konfab said:
Strawman.

This whole only came about because of the bandwidth requirements that products like Netflix and Youtube demanded. It wouldn't make economic sense to charge separately for sites that use almost nothing.

You are forgetting how much competition exists in this space. Lets say MWeb decides that Mybb puts out too many anti-Naspers articles and puts a R65 fee on myBB. Well what MWeb has done is made Afrihost's product R65 cheaper to an Mweb consumer. As an informed consumer would you stick to Mweb or would you move ISP?

The real funny thing is companies like Facebook and Google, whilst being the good fighters of net-neutrality in the US, do exactly what ComCast did in the developing world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_Zero
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Free_Zone

CellC does a similar thing. They have R12 a month for 600mb of Whatsapp data. Which effectively allows you to have unlimited internet calling for R12 a month. Which if you look at it really offers fantastic value for money. BBM also did a similar thing and that allowed thousands of people to access mobile internet at a time when it was really expensive.

Even WISPS technically do this by offering access to internet banking services so you can buy their products, but restricting everything else. According to net neutrality rules, that is illegal.
Click to expand...

How about if for some reason youtube throttled considerably everything anti-Trump. Or vice-versa.
Surely that's a bad thing?
There are some things the market cannot correct. Because we are not in a free market.
 
Cray said:
So how does that work in American towns with only one provider?
Click to expand...
If you live in the middle of nowhere and you want to watch SABC, you have to watch it through DSTV. So do you think the government should force DSTV to provide its service for free because DSTV is the only person who offers it?

Also
fcc-figure-5-2014-640x714.png

Using the old census tract data, the FCC's December 2013 statistics showed that 94 percent of tracts had at least two providers offering 10Mbps download speeds and 1.5Mbps upload speeds. The mid-2015 data shows a bit less competition at those speeds but isn't comparable because of the switch from tracts to blocks. The 2013 data didn't go above 10Mbps download speeds.
Click to expand...
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/08/us-broadband-still-no-isp-choice-for-many-especially-at-higher-speeds/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X