629
submitted 2 months ago by kinther@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] deranger@lemmy.world 260 points 2 months ago

The NCTA has repeatedly stated over the years that net neutrality rules aren't needed because ISPs already follow net neutrality principles. "Internet service providers have always delivered open, unrestricted Internet service. Consumers enjoy the web content and applications of their choosing without any blocking, throttling, or interference," the group said.

Lmao, really? The audacity of these cunts.

[-] baronvonj@lemmy.world 188 points 2 months ago

Wow. Talk about professional gaslighting. Not enough people are aware that the Obama-era FTC enacted the policy because AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon were all caught throttling Netflix and prioritizing their own competing services.

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 months ago

Thanks Obama

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 months ago

And tethering. Verizon was basically forced to stop blocking tethering apps by the FCC. My complaint was one of the ones which started the enforcement.

[-] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 105 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)
[-] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 24 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Maybe if they didn't sell people more bandwidth than they could provide they wouldn't have to throttle people below the service they paid for to work for everyone.

I would, in theory, be all for allowing companies to prioritize latency to services and protocols that benefit from it. Except they oversell the absolute shit out of their service, and can't be trusted to give you what you pay for if they don't like your traffic.

Failing to provide the full bandwidth they advertised for even one percent of a given month should result in fines that massively exceed what they charged for that month. Selling shit you don't have is not acceptable.

[-] bisby@lemmy.world 89 points 2 months ago

Oh good, if that is all true, you wont have to change anything to be compliant with new laws and should have no issue with them.

[-] WhatsThePoint@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

Money has no shame. Businesses only have reactionary shame in relation to possible loss of money.

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 months ago

It's funny because wireless ISPs literally advertise that they throttle video to certain resolutions unless you buy a higher tier.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Imprudent3449@lemm.ee 125 points 2 months ago

The cable lobby loves to bring up rural areas but when we gave them millions to build out they just took the money, said fuck it and did jack shit. I'm beginning to think that they prefer to under serve those areas and then use that as a bargaining chip to get everything they want.

[-] foggy@lemmy.world 52 points 2 months ago

I am in New England. Looking to buy a home. The amount of area that is not covered at 100/10 is fucking criminal. Like, they upped my price this year. For what? Transferring packets didn't get more expensive. Did you go e your employees raises? No? Are you expanding your infrastructure? No?

Like what the fuck.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] AdmiralShat@programming.dev 24 points 2 months ago

The power companies in my area started installing fiber on the power lines and running their own ISPs.

No data caps or anything, I'm raw dogging these torrents at like 80 megabytes a second, I even started running my own home server

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Speculater@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago

I almost feel bad for rural people until I realize they're the ones voting for the people who make sure rural people don't get services. Redneck America wants to close the USPS for fuck sakes.

[-] KinglyWeevil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 months ago

My parents live in butt fuck nowhere and are in a fiber co-op paying like $70/month for unlimited 1gbps up/down.

Meanwhile I live in the (extremely left) Capitol City of my state and pay Comcast $165/month for like 175mbps capped at 1TB, with some absurd overage fee like $10/5GB over until I hit $100 over and then it's "unlimited" but seems throttled.

[-] Aecosthedark@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

In Australia we watched American ISPs do exactly that and then we did the exact same thing with the exact same result because our politicians are corrupt pieces of shit with no backbone, integrity or ethics.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] daikiki@lemmy.world 117 points 2 months ago

Eminent domain the final mile and be done with it. These companies have no business holding our national infrastructure hostage.

[-] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 38 points 2 months ago

Taxpayers have already paid them billions for broken promises. It's been long demonstrated the oligopolistic communications industry cannot be trusted to provide what the public needs at fair pricing.

Its time to nationalize ISPs.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Ultragigagigantic@lemmy.world 98 points 2 months ago

Revoke their corporate charter, nationalize their infrastructure, sell it to municipal ISPs.

[-] androogee@midwest.social 35 points 2 months ago

Shoot them all into the sun.

[-] mPony@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

Nuke them from orbit - it's the only way to be sure

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

apparently its less effort/energy to shoot them into deep space.

but either way is good.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 97 points 2 months ago

Jessica Rosenworcel is a champ. She has been fighting this fight for years. The week Ajit Pai (Ashit Pie) ended net neutrality using falsified public comments, a group gathered in front of the FCC to protest the change. I went down there for a few hours and Jessica came to the window and waved to us.

[-] skygirl@lemmy.world 65 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Haha oh man it's weird to see this mentioned so many years later.

I helped organize that protest. Thanks for coming down with us!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] blazera@lemmy.world 85 points 2 months ago

thats cool how money lets you just, reject consequences for years

[-] Boozilla@lemmy.world 34 points 2 months ago

Works even better if you dye your skin orange and poop your pants.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz 84 points 2 months ago

“heavy-handed regulation will not just hobble network investment and innovation, it will also seriously jeopardize our nation’s collective efforts to build and sustain reliable broadband in rural and unserved communities”

They said exactly the same thing when the first net neutrality laws were getting put in place, then after the laws went into effect the companies went on to invest record amounts in innovation and infrastructure. Funny how their words are completely meaningless.

[-] kibiz0r@midwest.social 38 points 2 months ago

Yaknow what does hobble investment and innovation?

It rhymes with “shmonopolies”.

[-] tabular@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

"Innovation" just means ways to milk people these days .

[-] just_change_it@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

Innovation is part of the executive buzzword bingo board for all announcements.

It doesn't actually mean anything to these people. The only thing that has weight is what will enrich the wealth of the ownership class (shareholders.)

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] superfes@lemmy.world 77 points 2 months ago

Why can't you just be decent people?

[-] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 10 points 2 months ago

money corrupts. its always money. humans are weak

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 64 points 2 months ago

Can't wait until my liberal city finishes our city owned isp. You can't trust business to be in control of essential services

[-] ElectricAirship@lemmy.dbzer0.com 44 points 2 months ago

There was an academic paper put out a long time ago that basically argued for essential services like food, water, etc to be given non-profit status so corpo's couldn't do this sort of thing.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] redfox@infosec.pub 59 points 2 months ago

Every piece of shit greedy corporation can't hide from their lies when they say things are too expensive to implement correctly or pay people appropriately when they are simultaneously posting profits measured in billions...

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] RemoveEgoDivineFreedom@lemmy.world 51 points 2 months ago

Eat the rich. Fucking cunts.

[-] db2@lemmy.world 40 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

A threat like that should disqualify them from even trying to do it.

[-] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 29 points 2 months ago

You hear that, law school students? Job security! Because lawyers are the ones who really win in situations like this.

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 28 points 2 months ago

Fuck Ajit Pai. And fuck conservatives. They did this.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ATDA@lemmy.world 24 points 2 months ago

'We know we're the bad guys so we're going to announce our intentions like a comic book villain....'

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Buttons@programming.dev 23 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Let me plug Counter Points, a favorite political show of mine.

They recently talked about FTC Chair Lina Khan and Apple's monopoly, the government's anti-trust lawsuit against Apple, and monopolies in general. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMyChnACLKQ

It's tangential, but it came to mind.

If the cable companies want lawsuits, let's give them what they want in the form of anti-trust lawsuits and break them up.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 20 points 2 months ago

Good, let them use their money on litigation instead of lobbying.

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 months ago

Yup, I'm all for it. Put it in a ballot and we'll vote to enshrine it into law.

One of my general rules of thumb is: if cable companies are for it, it must suck.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago

These people forget that they have to exist physically alongside us "citizens". Your layers of obfuscation won't save your reputation forever. Eventually people will be so tired of everything be stacked against us we'll just riot and take from these corpos.

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 8 points 2 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


The Federal Communications Commission has scheduled an April 25 vote to restore net neutrality rules similar to the ones introduced during the Obama era and repealed under former President Trump.

"A return to the FCC's overwhelmingly popular and court-approved standard of net neutrality will allow the agency to serve once again as a strong consumer advocate of an open Internet."

In October 2023, the FCC voted 3–2 along party lines to seek public comment on restoring net neutrality rules and common-carrier regulation of Internet service providers under Title II of the Communications Act.

While there hasn't been a national standard since then-Chairman Ajit Pai led a repeal in 2017, Internet service providers still have to follow net neutrality rules because California and other states impose their own similar regulations.

"Reimposing heavy-handed regulation will not just hobble network investment and innovation, it will also seriously jeopardize our nation's collective efforts to build and sustain reliable broadband in rural and unserved communities," cable lobbyist Michael Powell said today.

The cable group argues that restoring net neutrality rules will interfere with the Biden administration plan to expand broadband access with a $42.45 billion grant program that will distribute public money to ISPs.


The original article contains 521 words, the summary contains 199 words. Saved 62%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] reddig33@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

Sounds like a good time to switch to 5G internet and cancel cable.

[-] NateSwift@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 months ago

I just wish it wasn’t so latent :(

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Treczoks@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

When companies protest against regulation while claiming that they already adhere to the same rules, then something is clearly off, and one better gets regulation through, because they plan to ditch that adherence as soon as the governmental regulations are off the table.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2024
629 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

55606 readers
4501 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS