1 hour ago, gleninjersey said:

Interesting topic which a few of my family where discussing at the family Thanksgiving get together.

Over view of discussion:

.

Take away was government helped create problem by helping companies in infancy of cable by essentially creating monopolies.  Then decades later with advent of streaming arose competition to monopolies.  New comers benefited by not paying more despite using more data.  2015 government intervenes and again creates problems because of what may happen.   This causes caling back of progress and expansion.  Now gov wants to repeal act to stimulate expansion and improvements in technology.  Some upset because blocking and throttling may occur even though it hadn't in past.  Concerns consumers may be forced to pay more.

 

 

 

 

sorry to chop post.....

 

most problems of these types are govt created.

 

 the gove that governs least governs best.

if you do it right, no one will be sure if you did anything at all.

@gleninjersey I linked something earlier in this thread that shows original "net neutrality" came up AFTER some cable companies started to throttle / control.  Just like you and I pay for "using" the net at home, companies like Google / Amazon / etc pay for connecting to backbones.  In fact, service companies often pay by bandwidth measure and not a "$30 / month unlimited" deals that individuals are offered.  "Unlimited" is just a marketing gimmick like it always was. 

People also quickly forget how some cable companies were fleecing customers by taking advantage of local monopoly. I dont believe fairness is in the DNA of some of these companies now complaining about net neutrality. 

 

1 hour ago, gleninjersey said:

  New comers benefited by not paying more despite using more data.  

This seems to be a falicy.  Everyone pays for their connections and data usage. Consumers, companies, everyone.  I’m sure Netflix pays a hefty price for their bandwidth and hosting agreements. Consumers certainly pay for their connection.   The difference is that without NN companies would be free to bias based on source/destination. So access to amazon, youporn, or Netflix would be limited to special packages. Imagine the Web carved up like cable channel packages except worse. 

little off topic....anyone remember garden state cable?

This was internet video about ten years ago:

 

This was internet "video" 20 years ago:

 

So if you're sitting here acting like "well see there, the government caused this because blah blah they weren't throttling nothing ten years ago!" Well then you maybe need a refresher that ten years ago Netflix used to mail you DVDs....

There is literally no such thing as "it was fine in the past" with this issue. 

I only have one internet option, just one. I have no other choice if my ISP decides to control which websites i have access to and if they want to slow down speeds to services like Amazon or Netflix. This whole issue started with video streaming services. 

Metro PCS stopped all streaming expect Youtube and Verizon was throttling down netflix connections. If you think ISPs weren't doing this then  Imagine when you buy your internet service you get to pick packages based on what site and services you use. It makes no sense to allow companies the ability to regulate content. If i pay for 60mbs service a month, the only bottle neck should be on the server end of what I'm accessing. There is no legitimate reason for ISPs to artificially manipulate connection speeds. They are trying to get companies to pay them for priority service... AND get the consumer to pay more for services.

This is nothing more than a money grab.

If you think this is about breaking monopolies your living in denial about how government regulation is bad. This has been around for only a few years, and there is nothing to suggest it would be any different then before it was implemented.

If your VPN shows outside the USA , will it matter on the speed?