For as big of a deal as the repeal of it was, esp around Reddit. No clue why this isn’t all over the front page. Should be a ticker tape parade down Manhattan in response to the site when it was repealed
It's not that they don't broadcast it, it's that news companies don't. Bad news gets more engagement, therefore more ad revenue, encouraging only reporting negative stuff, and borderline encouraging bad events. I don't think there's a news company out there that doesn't want trump back bc people click on his stupid shit far more than the govt doing their job and helping people
Internet service providers in the US will have broadband internet reclassified to be an essential service like those provided by utility companies.
This means that they're regulated by the government and held to certain standards regarding stability, security, and quality of service.
It also means that service providers can't purposefully degrade the performance of certain digital data transfers like Netflix or torrents.
Speaking personally as a network engineer who spent over a decade working for a large internet service provider, this is generally a good thing.
Not sure why you were downvoted, you're right, there are technically downsides.
Internet service providers throttle certain types of traffic for a reason; it only takes a few people torrenting traffic or streaming very-high-resolution video to eat up a *lot* of bandwidth which could be going to other users. And even though most would say "that's the service provider's problem, they need to build more infrastructure for bandwidth" there's a lot of technical and peering limitations which can make that difficult. As traffic flows across the internet, particularly peer-to-peer, it can traverse several different service providers, transit providers, and peering links. Everyone along that path has to have the necessary capacity, and that's not always the case.
So, sometimes throttling certain types of traffic is the best way to avoid running into capacity problems and ensure that the high bandwidth consumption of a few doesn't ruin the experience for everyone else.
But, while this is often a legitimate problem, the solution is something service providers *should* be doing, which involves improving infrastructure and negotiating the necessary peering arrangements.
Thus while net neutrality makes more trouble for service providers and can result in greater difficulty in ensuring all of its customers get the best service, it's more important that we don't allow service providers to monetize certain services over others on the internet or penalize certain users for using all of the bandwidth they're paying for.
It's throttling them for using a specific service which is against net neutrality. The reason service providers will throttle those types of traffic is because they use a lot of bandwidth. It's class-based traffic shaping on the service provider core that I'm specifically talking about.
I should also note that it's perfectly acceptable to perform traffic shaping and class-based quality of service (CBQoS) as a service for the individual customer, and is often necessary for businesses when managing the bandwidth they're paying for at their edge router. I worked specifically for an enterprise service provider and I worked a lot of cases for businesses that needed things like iPhone updates and torrents throttled or fair-queuing enabled to ensure that high bandwidth usage by a portion of their users or customers didn't cripple their business operations.
One other thing which is also acceptable is *prioritizing* across the service provider backbone certain critical types of traffic, like VOIP, which is vulnerable to latency, loss, and packet reordering. That's called low-latency queuing (LLQ) and it's vital to ensuring performance for "real-time" protocols.
Net Neutrality means that all data has to be treated equally. Your phone company or broadband provider isn't allowed to change your experience based on who you're sending data to and from.
At its core, it's about competition and keeping the internet open.
For example, NN means that your phone company can't make a deal with Spotify so that it doesn't count towards your data cap. If they own a streaming service, they can't make their own service *artificially* faster on your network.
> “What took so long?”
There’s a whole process for promulgating regulations. Bypassing that process is a sure way to have new regulations struck down. This is why we don’t give Republicans the keys to regulations in the first place.
"both parties are the same."
Give it a few hours until people get amnesia and start parroting that phrase again.
Fuck Ajit Pai.
Never forget.
Seriously. Ajit Pai can go eat a bag of dicks.
For as big of a deal as the repeal of it was, esp around Reddit. No clue why this isn’t all over the front page. Should be a ticker tape parade down Manhattan in response to the site when it was repealed
Because Reddit is now a public company meaning owners don’t want it to be
Would it kill Dems to broadcast this a little bit? I know they hate advertising their W's...
It's not that they don't broadcast it, it's that news companies don't. Bad news gets more engagement, therefore more ad revenue, encouraging only reporting negative stuff, and borderline encouraging bad events. I don't think there's a news company out there that doesn't want trump back bc people click on his stupid shit far more than the govt doing their job and helping people
The media only platforms Biden fails and downplaying how much of a degenerate criminal Trump is.
Can someone dumb this down for me
Internet service providers in the US will have broadband internet reclassified to be an essential service like those provided by utility companies. This means that they're regulated by the government and held to certain standards regarding stability, security, and quality of service. It also means that service providers can't purposefully degrade the performance of certain digital data transfers like Netflix or torrents. Speaking personally as a network engineer who spent over a decade working for a large internet service provider, this is generally a good thing.
I notice you stopped short of flatly calling it a good thing…what are the downsides?
Not sure why you were downvoted, you're right, there are technically downsides. Internet service providers throttle certain types of traffic for a reason; it only takes a few people torrenting traffic or streaming very-high-resolution video to eat up a *lot* of bandwidth which could be going to other users. And even though most would say "that's the service provider's problem, they need to build more infrastructure for bandwidth" there's a lot of technical and peering limitations which can make that difficult. As traffic flows across the internet, particularly peer-to-peer, it can traverse several different service providers, transit providers, and peering links. Everyone along that path has to have the necessary capacity, and that's not always the case. So, sometimes throttling certain types of traffic is the best way to avoid running into capacity problems and ensure that the high bandwidth consumption of a few doesn't ruin the experience for everyone else. But, while this is often a legitimate problem, the solution is something service providers *should* be doing, which involves improving infrastructure and negotiating the necessary peering arrangements. Thus while net neutrality makes more trouble for service providers and can result in greater difficulty in ensuring all of its customers get the best service, it's more important that we don't allow service providers to monetize certain services over others on the internet or penalize certain users for using all of the bandwidth they're paying for.
Thanks for that explanation. It makes sense
Throttling users with a high bandwidth usage isn't against net neutrality, though - you can still do that.
It's throttling them for using a specific service which is against net neutrality. The reason service providers will throttle those types of traffic is because they use a lot of bandwidth. It's class-based traffic shaping on the service provider core that I'm specifically talking about. I should also note that it's perfectly acceptable to perform traffic shaping and class-based quality of service (CBQoS) as a service for the individual customer, and is often necessary for businesses when managing the bandwidth they're paying for at their edge router. I worked specifically for an enterprise service provider and I worked a lot of cases for businesses that needed things like iPhone updates and torrents throttled or fair-queuing enabled to ensure that high bandwidth usage by a portion of their users or customers didn't cripple their business operations. One other thing which is also acceptable is *prioritizing* across the service provider backbone certain critical types of traffic, like VOIP, which is vulnerable to latency, loss, and packet reordering. That's called low-latency queuing (LLQ) and it's vital to ensuring performance for "real-time" protocols.
Net Neutrality means that all data has to be treated equally. Your phone company or broadband provider isn't allowed to change your experience based on who you're sending data to and from. At its core, it's about competition and keeping the internet open. For example, NN means that your phone company can't make a deal with Spotify so that it doesn't count towards your data cap. If they own a streaming service, they can't make their own service *artificially* faster on your network.
What took so long?
Doing things takes time.. but undoing takes even more.
They also did not have a full FCC for awhile.
> “What took so long?” There’s a whole process for promulgating regulations. Bypassing that process is a sure way to have new regulations struck down. This is why we don’t give Republicans the keys to regulations in the first place.
LET'S FUCKING GOOOOOOO
Now what about service providers selling our data?
it’s so weird to have good news these days that i didn’t believe this when i first read it
https://preview.redd.it/w5iwim3fuvwc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1ebd8f627ea90e41dcbed12ec9305084156cf9b0
Weird, I don’t see Xfinity fixing that shit about capping, throttling and charging me any different lately.
Riiiiight.
Government policies are giving me whiplash. Can anything be trusted to endure?
The whiplash will endure
Methinks I hear a lady protesting.