Quoted:
Thanks. I let them know I support ending net neutrality.

Quoted:

Sorry you've come to the wrong conclusion again but you could probably see why it's wrong to base your opinion on a court decision that got completely overturned. I don't know why you got butthurt for me pointing out that the appeal court's decision makes everything you stated from the district court a moot point. It's nothing personal, it's just true.

Quoted:

I can tell you all the reasons why NN is bad, the many reasons have been posted.  That soros is pushing it so hard should be reason enough.

Quoted:
The people who are pro-net neutrality are either ill informed, a giant telecom company that wishes to box out competition, or on the left.

Quoted:
the FCC votes tomorrow.

If you haven't already voiced your opinion against the misleading "Restoring Internet Freedom" deal they've been tricking everyone into supporting, then go to gofccyourself.com and leave a comment in support of Net Neutrality.

Your wallet depends on this and ending NN is a fix that doesn't have a problem. Don't let them do this.

Quoted:

Enforcement of those laws often comes under regulatory agencies, just like gun laws come under the ATF.

When there's a true gun friendly president in office, he may direct the ATF to lay off of certain things or to more vigorously enforce certain policies.

The anti-trust and monopolies are similar because a presidential administration can open the door to abuse and redirect his agencies' focus elsewhere. Ending NN does just that.

Quoted:
I’d trust pol pot before I trust the cunt who runs Comcast.

Quoted:

Holy fuck, are you really advocating for Net Neutrality by singing the praises of the ATF???

Quoted:
the FCC votes tomorrow.

If you haven't already voiced your opinion against the misleading "Restoring Internet Freedom" deal they've been tricking everyone into supporting, then go to gofccyourself.com and leave a comment in support of Net Neutrality.

Your wallet depends on this and ending NN is a fix that doesn't have a problem. Don't let them do this.

Quoted:

The real point is here is that you have no real idea what Net Neutrality is really about, you don't know what it does and doesn't entail, you don't understand the actual situation from an economic or technical perspective, and you don't understand how government regulations works.

Quoted:
The people who are pro-net neutrality are either ill informed, a giant telecom company that wishes to box out competition, or on the left.

Quoted:
It would be in our best interest if trolls like OP were banned

Quoted:
Let me know when Spidey shows up and we get to talk about smart pipes!

Quoted:

Nope. But they are actually a good comparison because they are regulatory agencies under the executive branch. The EB gets to set the agenda and choose what to focus on, or even to focus on anything at all. They really aren't run any different at that level.

I will say that the last time NN came up there were millions of comments left for the FCC and <1% was against it. Now your net company is paying bookoo bucks to make you believe that revoking the NN rules is good for you. It isn't. It's far from good for any of us.

Quoted:
the FCC votes tomorrow.

If you haven't already voiced your opinion against the misleading "Restoring Internet Freedom" deal they've been tricking everyone into supporting, then go to gofccyourself.com and leave a comment in support of Net Neutrality.

Your wallet depends on this and ending NN is a fix that doesn't have a problem. Don't let them do this.

Quoted:
they just cleared the room due to something having to do with security.

Pai was handed a note and said "On the advice of security we need to take a recess."

Quoted:

@Tsetse

First you need to understand how this is all connected.  In general, there are 2 types of ISPs.  "Last mile carriers" and "Backhaul carriers"  This gets a bit muddy because some last mile carriers have backhaul networks, and some backhaul carriers have last mile networks, but for the sake of this discussion we'll keep them in two separate groups.

Last mile carriers are the ISPs that bring the cables (phone line, coax, fiber, wireless, whatever) from their core network to your house.  This is the ISP that invoices you and you pay every month for your internet service.  This Last mile carrier has something that's referred to as a "border" where they connect their core network with a backhaul carrier.

The backhaul carriers are the BIG companies that built this whole "Internet" thing.  They did that by investing trillions of dollars running and continuing to run fiber optic cables EVERYWHERE.  These backhaul carriers all got together and realized that they needed to come up with a fair and equitable method and price structure for freely and  openly exchanging the information on their networks.  Thus the Symmetric Peering Arrangement was born.

The Symmetric Peering Arrangement was basically this.  "You have lots of data, and I have lots of data.  Let us exchange this data equally, however much data you send me I will send you an equal amount of data and we'll all just agree to not charge each other any money for that exchange."  But wait?  What if they exchange an unequal amount of data? This is the Asymmetric Peering Arrangement, typically it's the same thing as the Symmetric Peering Arrangement except that the both parties agree to pay for the non-symmetric amounts of data.  This is what lead to the internet.  Basically all these carriers put all their interconnecting and cross connecting points in free and open spaces, called Internet Exchanges.  Anyone who showed up and put a "point of presence" in the Exchange had the ability to talk to anyone else in the Exchange and negotiate peering arrangements or even just ask nicely to exchange traffic or whatever.  Here's a guy who setup a peering point in an Internet Exchange and essentially became is own ISP for no other reason that he thought it would be fun.

Now comes Netflix.  Remember ANYONE can have a presence at an Internet Exchange including hosting companies, data center providers, whoever the fuck wants to.  So that's exactly what Netflix did, they set up POPs at various Internet Exchanges over dark fiber from their data centers (dark fiber is a service where you buy a fiber strand from point A to point B with no actual "service" on it, it's just the fiber and you put your own optical gear on either end.)

Basically when they did this, they talked to everyone there and explained what they were about, that they provide a streaming movie service that's legit and legal and made the case that the carriers downstream last mile ISPs and assorted home subscribers would probably love to have access to their content.  They made a good case, and the carriers agreed that peering that content to their downstream customers was probably a good move.  So they gave Netflix some 10Gbps and 40Gbps cross connects told them "hey this is on us, no charge" and called it a day. (This is extremely common, so common that there's an entire automated system in place run by the volunteers that operate the Exchanges to facilitate it)

Well, you can probably guess what happened, Netflix grew and became crazy popular and their traffic eventually started beating those cross connects like red headed stepchildren.  We're talking 100% full ALL the time.  As others have touched on, when a link is 100% full, bad shit happens as one poster described as "a bunch of drunk guys screaming at each other in a bar."  The end result of this would be the rest of the Internet works just fine, but Netflix runs like TOTAL SHIT.  Stuttering, jitter, buffering, garbled frames, all that stuff.  When this happened, Netflix was like "OMG can we please get some additional cross connects?"  The carriers (or in the first case of it happening, Verizon) responded with statements to the affect of "Wow, yeah you need some more cross connects, but that's a lot of asymmetric traffic, we're going to have to work out an asymmetric peering arrangement where you pay for the difference in traffic, just like we've done for decades with everyone else we do this with."

Now, you see what happened next was...Netflix didn't respond by saying "Oh ok, sure we'll sit down and work out the details" they responded by being pissed off and demanding that peering for FREE because having to pay for it like EVERYONE else had to do so up to that point was tantamount to an unfair business practice.  Now the stories I've heard talking to people over at Verizon was that the business managers were kinda shocked and confused at the response, while the engineering teams nearly herniated themselves from laughing.

Now, looking at the situation, Verizon didn't "throttle" Netflix, they didn't demand payment for a "fast lane", they didn't stroke their bad guy mustache and say "Muhahahaha, we're going to use this situation give our own content delivery platform a market advantage!"  It was literally just a standard negotiation for an asymmetric peering agreement with some minor middle manager's assistant in the sub-division handling administrative and sales tasks for that region that the Internet Exchange was in. All it was, was a pretty basic business arrangement between two companies, as Netflix' traffic utilization scaled up, so would the amount they paid to deliver it and the necessary upgrades needed would be funded.

Netflix wasn't having it.  Not long after that, the CEO of Netflix did an interview with some trendy tech publication in Silicon Valley (I think it was Gizmodo, but I can't remember for sure) talking about how the big evil Verizon was "throttling" them and how we needed "Net Neutrality" to stop this.

Yes, that was their argument, that them saturating their free interconnects and being required to pay for more capacity was "throttling" and it needed to be "stopped" by the FCC (that's code for using the federal government to force Verizon to give them that capacity for free).

So the conclusion is that the carriers HAVE FIGURED IT OUT.  They charged Netflix, and Netflix eventually paid.  The Last mile carriers wound doing something similar by instituting data caps and charging extra to those who had high utilization.  Then everyone started implementing traffic shaping and management methods and technology to get the Netflix utilization under control at the last mile.

Problem is now solved.

Here's where Net Neutrality comes back in.  Netflix and Google and Facebook and whoever all still want it because they want to force peering arrangements beneficial to them.  But the end result of Net Neutrality would be to remove the carriers solution of dealing with this problem, namely charging Netflix and Google for their upstream consumption at the peering level, and using traffic shaping and management technologies at the last mile level.

Let me state that again,  NET NEUTRALITY WOULD REMOVE THE ALREADY EXITING SOLUTION.  It would cut the revenue stream at the peering level, and it would remove the traffic shaping and management at the last mile level.  This would INCREASE the strain on the carrier networks, AND reduce the spending on upgrading the carrier networks.  It will LITERALLY make EVERYTHING worse.

THAT is why the carriers are against Net Neutrality.

Quoted:
3 to 2 to kill NN.

Byeeeeee!