Thanks FCC!

[Irvinecommuter]

They can't even wait a day

Here's what @comcast removed from their Net Neutrality page. They no longer promise to:

-Not throttle back the speed at which content comes to you
-Not prioritize Internet traffic or create paid fast lanes
-Make internet accessible to low income families

 

[Liar Loan]

I think our recent roller coaster ride with the mortgage and banking industry can provide good context and history.

This isn't a good example.  There were 7 Federal agencies and 51 state agencies, including D.C., regulating mortgages prior to the crash.

Enforcing what regulations and rules?  Most of the protections were striped away and they were largely using rules and regulations from the 1930s.

This isn't worth responding to because you are out of your league here. 

1968 - Truth in Lending Act
1970 - Fair Credit Reporting Act
1970 - Bank Secrecy Act
1974 - Equal Credit Opportunity Act
1975 - Home Mortgage Disclosure Act
1977 - Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
1977 - Community Reinvestment Act
1978 - Electronic Fund Transfer Act
1978 - International Banking Act
1987 - Expedited Funds Availability Act
1991 - Truth in Savings Act
1999 - Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
1999 - Right to Financial Privacy Act
2001 - The Patriot Act

These are just the Federal laws that were in place prior to 2008.  Each state has its own patchwork of mortgage & banking rules to follow as well.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

I think our recent roller coaster ride with the mortgage and banking industry can provide good context and history.

This isn't a good example.  There were 7 Federal agencies and 51 state agencies, including D.C., regulating mortgages prior to the crash.

Enforcing what regulations and rules?  Most of the protections were striped away and they were largely using rules and regulations from the 1930s.

This isn't worth responding to because you are out of your league here. 

1968 - Truth in Lending Act
1970 - Fair Credit Reporting Act
1970 - Bank Secrecy Act
1974 - Equal Credit Opportunity Act
1975 - Home Mortgage Disclosure Act
1977 - Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
1977 - Community Reinvestment Act
1978 - Electronic Fund Transfer Act
1978 - International Banking Act
1987 - Expedited Funds Availability Act
1991 - Truth in Savings Act
1999 - Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
1999 - Right to Financial Privacy Act
2001 - The Patriot Act

These are just the Federal laws that were in place prior to 2008.  Each state has its own patchwork of mortgage & banking rules to follow as well.

Okay, I will take a swing:

Some of those relate to the tracking of money and privacy issues GLB, RFPA, EFTA, IBA, EFAA, BSA, Patriot Act

Some of the others have to do with access to credit:  ECOA, CRA, RFPA, HMDA (and the FIRREA amendments).

Lenders are also excluded from application of certain acts like FDCPA.

TILA is the most applicable as to lending practices and it was a mess until very recently. 

And of course you have the repeal of Glass-Steagell and the enactment of GLB, that took risk of out lender's hands and spread them across the economy, which resulted in lender taking ridiculous risks.

We also have severely lax enforcement by the regulatory bodies about lending.

Prior to the housing crisis, there were very few state regulations because of federal preemption.

Edit:  you forgot about RESPA but that has to more about fee disclosures and prevents kickbacks by lenders to third parties.  Both RESPA and TILA are
generally private enforcement actions (brought by borrowers) with a 1 to 3 year statute of limitation.  They also almost never constitute material breaches sufficient to a fraud claim.

The federal government overrode anti-predatory state laws. In 2004, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency federally preempted state laws regulating mortgage credit and national banks, including anti-predatory lending laws on their books (along with lower defaults and foreclosure rates).

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/11/22/5086/#668b809ef92f

I mean...I only did 4 years of mortgage litigation.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Let's not forget the ultimate fanboy of banking deregulation admitted that:

The financial crisis even prompted the Republican Greenspan, a staunch believer in free markets, to propose that government consider tougher regulations, including requiring financial firms that package mortgages into securities to keep a portion as a check on quality.

Greenspan, 82, acknowledged under questioning that he had made a ?mistake? in believing that banks, operating in their own self-interest, would do what was necessary to protect their shareholders and institutions. Greenspan called that ?a flaw in the model ... that defines how the world works.?

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/27335454/...an-admits-mistake-helped-crisis/#.WjL-21WnGUk

 

[Liar Loan]

So besides agreeing with me that lenders were not, in fact, operating on 1930's rules, you also agree that banking's top regulator, Alan Greenspan, failed in his duties?  Thanks.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

So besides agreeing with me that lenders were not, in fact, operating on 1930's rules, you also agree that banking's top regulator, Alan Greenspan, failed in his duties?  Thanks.

Lending practices are governed by 1930s rules...we didn't have a meltdown in the economy because of privacy issues.

He didn't fail in his duties...there were no substantive regulations to enforce. 

 

[OCtoSV]

The repeal of NN will be a huge job engine as now the Service Providers will have financial incentive to invest in their networks, and the downstream impact to the hardware and software companies that supply the platforms that power their networks will experience a new era of growth. Why would Broadcom invest R&D to implement advance features in new silicon if there is no market for those features due to onerous federal regulation?

Don' t drink the Kool-Aid - existing NN regulatory environment has been a drag on the economy.

Because ISP will have no incentives to invest in their networks after NN.  They have a virtual monopoly and providing network does not make money...providing and selling content do.
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/...t-neutrality-will-harm-innovation-in-america/

If the rules are rolled back, more of these arrangements are likely to appear. ISPs will also start offering paid prioritization. Some of these ?fast lane? deals might not lead to higher prices for consumers. But entrepreneurs are rightly concerned that large companies will spend heavily to dominate fast-lane access, making it harder for some startups, such as bandwidth-hungry mobile video companies, to challenge them. ?Milliseconds of difference can leave you at a disadvantage when potential customers are evaluating your product,? explains Tom Lee, the head of policy at Mapbox, a location data platform for mobile and Web applications.

Even the very biggest startups could suffer. In an IPO filing published earlier this year, Snap warned that weakening or ending net neutrality would hurt its business if ISPs limited access to it or favored its rivals (see ?Why Snap Is Worried About Net Neutrality?). Young companies that pay up for higher speeds would have to pass those costs on to consumers, making it harder to compete with bigger players.

Big ISPs say they?re committed to keeping a level playing field, but history and economic realism suggest they won?t. AT&T, for instance, blocked Skype and other Internet calling services on iPhones on its network until 2009. In many markets in America, there are still only one or two high-speed broadband providers. The lack of competition means there?s little to deter them from discriminating against services that pose a threat to their own offerings.

Dude - Service Providers (like VZ, AT&T, TMO, the MSOs) make the vast majority of their money from PROVIDING NETWORK SERVICES!!! The existing regulations transferred operating margin from the SPs to the OTTs. Why should I care if GOOG/FANG op margin goes down, and if VCs have fewer deals because many of the startup biz models will be impacted by market based pricing for network bandwidth and services?

 

[OCtoSV]

The repeal of NN will be a huge job engine as now the Service Providers will have financial incentive to invest in their networks, and the downstream impact to the hardware and software companies that supply the platforms that power their networks will experience a new era of growth. Why would Broadcom invest R&D to implement advance features in new silicon if there is no market for those features due to onerous federal regulation?

Don' t drink the Kool-Aid - existing NN regulatory environment has been a drag on the economy.

Because all those advanced features still are needed  even with net neutrality.  QoS allows the management of the network to insure all services have adequate bandwidth.  QoS to throttle individual content sites is not a job engine and frankly is 1990s technology.

The problem with investment isn't the backbone network, it's the last mile network.

Hence, I have two providers.  And really, that's only recently.  Before that it was one.

Access network is low margin business for the network equipment vendors. 5G will be a huge disruption for many SPs and RAN vendors, and repeal of NN should accelerate the investment to transform the core and edge.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

The repeal of NN will be a huge job engine as now the Service Providers will have financial incentive to invest in their networks, and the downstream impact to the hardware and software companies that supply the platforms that power their networks will experience a new era of growth. Why would Broadcom invest R&D to implement advance features in new silicon if there is no market for those features due to onerous federal regulation?

Don' t drink the Kool-Aid - existing NN regulatory environment has been a drag on the economy.

Because ISP will have no incentives to invest in their networks after NN.  They have a virtual monopoly and providing network does not make money...providing and selling content do.
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/...t-neutrality-will-harm-innovation-in-america/

If the rules are rolled back, more of these arrangements are likely to appear. ISPs will also start offering paid prioritization. Some of these ?fast lane? deals might not lead to higher prices for consumers. But entrepreneurs are rightly concerned that large companies will spend heavily to dominate fast-lane access, making it harder for some startups, such as bandwidth-hungry mobile video companies, to challenge them. ?Milliseconds of difference can leave you at a disadvantage when potential customers are evaluating your product,? explains Tom Lee, the head of policy at Mapbox, a location data platform for mobile and Web applications.

Even the very biggest startups could suffer. In an IPO filing published earlier this year, Snap warned that weakening or ending net neutrality would hurt its business if ISPs limited access to it or favored its rivals (see ?Why Snap Is Worried About Net Neutrality?). Young companies that pay up for higher speeds would have to pass those costs on to consumers, making it harder to compete with bigger players.

Big ISPs say they?re committed to keeping a level playing field, but history and economic realism suggest they won?t. AT&T, for instance, blocked Skype and other Internet calling services on iPhones on its network until 2009. In many markets in America, there are still only one or two high-speed broadband providers. The lack of competition means there?s little to deter them from discriminating against services that pose a threat to their own offerings.

Dude - Service Providers (like VZ, AT&T, TMO, the MSOs) make the vast majority of their money from PROVIDING NETWORK SERVICES!!! The existing regulations transferred operating margin from the SPs to the OTTs. Why should I care if GOOG/FANG op margin goes down, and if VCs have fewer deals because many of the startup biz models will be impacted by market based pricing for network bandwidth and services?

I don't care about their margins...I care about access to content being equal.  I want to pay the same rate for Youtube as I do Netflix or whatever video platform comes in the future. 

Not to mention the next group of YTs maybe never come because the start up costs is too high.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

The repeal of NN will be a huge job engine as now the Service Providers will have financial incentive to invest in their networks, and the downstream impact to the hardware and software companies that supply the platforms that power their networks will experience a new era of growth. Why would Broadcom invest R&D to implement advance features in new silicon if there is no market for those features due to onerous federal regulation?

Don' t drink the Kool-Aid - existing NN regulatory environment has been a drag on the economy.

Because all those advanced features still are needed  even with net neutrality.  QoS allows the management of the network to insure all services have adequate bandwidth.  QoS to throttle individual content sites is not a job engine and frankly is 1990s technology.

The problem with investment isn't the backbone network, it's the last mile network.

Hence, I have two providers.  And really, that's only recently.  Before that it was one.

Access network is low margin business for the network equipment vendors. 5G will be a huge disruption for many SPs and RAN vendors, and repeal of NN should accelerate the investment to transform the core and edge.

Those things are already happening because of the changing market and use of mobile devices. 

If anything, repeal of NN slows down that process because ISPs can more money on existing transmission methods.  The people who are starting 5G are the same people who are providing the home internet/wifi. 

 

[OCtoSV]

The repeal of NN will be a huge job engine as now the Service Providers will have financial incentive to invest in their networks, and the downstream impact to the hardware and software companies that supply the platforms that power their networks will experience a new era of growth. Why would Broadcom invest R&D to implement advance features in new silicon if there is no market for those features due to onerous federal regulation?

Don' t drink the Kool-Aid - existing NN regulatory environment has been a drag on the economy.

Because all those advanced features still are needed  even with net neutrality.  QoS allows the management of the network to insure all services have adequate bandwidth.  QoS to throttle individual content sites is not a job engine and frankly is 1990s technology.

The problem with investment isn't the backbone network, it's the last mile network.

Hence, I have two providers.  And really, that's only recently.  Before that it was one.

Access network is low margin business for the network equipment vendors. 5G will be a huge disruption for many SPs and RAN vendors, and repeal of NN should accelerate the investment to transform the core and edge.

Those things are already happening because of the changing market and use of mobile devices. 

If anything, repeal of NN slows down that process because ISPs can more money on existing transmission methods.  The people who are starting 5G are the same people who are providing the home internet/wifi.

It doesn't sound like you're familiar with the changes in the architecture and who is driving what. Here is some material to educate yourself on 5G:
money paragraph: "5G will employ sophisticated mechanisms to handle different kinds of traffic flows, enabling 5G to address a wider range of use cases than prior technology generations, such as 3G and 4G,? he said in a statement. ?Many of the applications envisioned for 5G are of a control nature, needing minimal delay and high reliability. These applications will depend on traffic prioritization, a capability constrained by current net neutrality rules."
https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/fcc-s-plan-to-toss-net-neutrality-a-win-for-5g-analyst

 

[Irvinecommuter]

The repeal of NN will be a huge job engine as now the Service Providers will have financial incentive to invest in their networks, and the downstream impact to the hardware and software companies that supply the platforms that power their networks will experience a new era of growth. Why would Broadcom invest R&D to implement advance features in new silicon if there is no market for those features due to onerous federal regulation?

Don' t drink the Kool-Aid - existing NN regulatory environment has been a drag on the economy.

Because all those advanced features still are needed  even with net neutrality.  QoS allows the management of the network to insure all services have adequate bandwidth.  QoS to throttle individual content sites is not a job engine and frankly is 1990s technology.

The problem with investment isn't the backbone network, it's the last mile network.

Hence, I have two providers.  And really, that's only recently.  Before that it was one.

Access network is low margin business for the network equipment vendors. 5G will be a huge disruption for many SPs and RAN vendors, and repeal of NN should accelerate the investment to transform the core and edge.

Those things are already happening because of the changing market and use of mobile devices. 

If anything, repeal of NN slows down that process because ISPs can more money on existing transmission methods.  The people who are starting 5G are the same people who are providing the home internet/wifi.

It doesn't sound like you're familiar with the changes in the architecture and who is driving what. Here is some material to educate yourself on 5G:
money paragraph: "5G will employ sophisticated mechanisms to handle different kinds of traffic flows, enabling 5G to address a wider range of use cases than prior technology generations, such as 3G and 4G,? he said in a statement. ?Many of the applications envisioned for 5G are of a control nature, needing minimal delay and high reliability. These applications will depend on traffic prioritization, a capability constrained by current net neutrality rules."
https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/fcc-s-plan-to-toss-net-neutrality-a-win-for-5g-analyst

I know what 5G is.  You will still be subject to data limits and caps imposed by the service provider.  We are not talking about capacity but access.  Doesn't matter if you have 15 lane freeway if you are only allowed to go 30 mph unless you pay extra.

And that has nothing to do with NN and home/business internet providers.  Ultimately, the repeal of NN means that I have to trust Cox and Comcast to do what is best for me, not their bottom line.  That is a pipe dream. 

I also don't know why you keep bringing up AT&T and TMobile...mobile internet is not subject to net neutrality rule.
https://www.marketplace.org/2017/12/14/tech/net-neutrality-gone-so-now-what-consumers

 

[curious george]

COX already doing that as we speak, unbelievable!

 

[OCtoSV]

The repeal of NN will be a huge job engine as now the Service Providers will have financial incentive to invest in their networks, and the downstream impact to the hardware and software companies that supply the platforms that power their networks will experience a new era of growth. Why would Broadcom invest R&D to implement advance features in new silicon if there is no market for those features due to onerous federal regulation?

Don' t drink the Kool-Aid - existing NN regulatory environment has been a drag on the economy.

Because all those advanced features still are needed  even with net neutrality.  QoS allows the management of the network to insure all services have adequate bandwidth.  QoS to throttle individual content sites is not a job engine and frankly is 1990s technology.

The problem with investment isn't the backbone network, it's the last mile network.

Hence, I have two providers.  And really, that's only recently.  Before that it was one.

Access network is low margin business for the network equipment vendors. 5G will be a huge disruption for many SPs and RAN vendors, and repeal of NN should accelerate the investment to transform the core and edge.

Those things are already happening because of the changing market and use of mobile devices. 

If anything, repeal of NN slows down that process because ISPs can more money on existing transmission methods.  The people who are starting 5G are the same people who are providing the home internet/wifi.

It doesn't sound like you're familiar with the changes in the architecture and who is driving what. Here is some material to educate yourself on 5G:
money paragraph: "5G will employ sophisticated mechanisms to handle different kinds of traffic flows, enabling 5G to address a wider range of use cases than prior technology generations, such as 3G and 4G,? he said in a statement. ?Many of the applications envisioned for 5G are of a control nature, needing minimal delay and high reliability. These applications will depend on traffic prioritization, a capability constrained by current net neutrality rules."
https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/fcc-s-plan-to-toss-net-neutrality-a-win-for-5g-analyst

I know what 5G is.  You will still be subject to data limits and caps imposed by the service provider.  We are not talking about capacity but access.  Doesn't matter if you have 15 lane freeway if you are only allowed to go 30 mph unless you pay extra.

And that has nothing to do with NN and home/business internet providers.  Ultimately, the repeal of NN means that I have to trust Cox and Comcast to do what is best for me, not their bottom line.  That is a pipe dream. 

I also don't know why you keep bringing up AT&T and TMobile...mobile internet is not subject to net neutrality rule.
https://www.marketplace.org/2017/12/14/tech/net-neutrality-gone-so-now-what-consumers

What are you talking about? MNOs are not exempted - they stand to benefit the most! Did you read the article? Here is another money excerpt from it that relates to your desire to get all OTT services delivered at the same speed without being required to pay more to the network owner/operator: "The requirement that a heart monitor transmission to a hospital emergency room cannot be treated as any more special than a cat video is absurd"

 

[Irvinecommuter]

The repeal of NN will be a huge job engine as now the Service Providers will have financial incentive to invest in their networks, and the downstream impact to the hardware and software companies that supply the platforms that power their networks will experience a new era of growth. Why would Broadcom invest R&D to implement advance features in new silicon if there is no market for those features due to onerous federal regulation?

Don' t drink the Kool-Aid - existing NN regulatory environment has been a drag on the economy.

Because all those advanced features still are needed  even with net neutrality.  QoS allows the management of the network to insure all services have adequate bandwidth.  QoS to throttle individual content sites is not a job engine and frankly is 1990s technology.

The problem with investment isn't the backbone network, it's the last mile network.

Hence, I have two providers.  And really, that's only recently.  Before that it was one.

Access network is low margin business for the network equipment vendors. 5G will be a huge disruption for many SPs and RAN vendors, and repeal of NN should accelerate the investment to transform the core and edge.

Those things are already happening because of the changing market and use of mobile devices. 

If anything, repeal of NN slows down that process because ISPs can more money on existing transmission methods.  The people who are starting 5G are the same people who are providing the home internet/wifi.

It doesn't sound like you're familiar with the changes in the architecture and who is driving what. Here is some material to educate yourself on 5G:
money paragraph: "5G will employ sophisticated mechanisms to handle different kinds of traffic flows, enabling 5G to address a wider range of use cases than prior technology generations, such as 3G and 4G,? he said in a statement. ?Many of the applications envisioned for 5G are of a control nature, needing minimal delay and high reliability. These applications will depend on traffic prioritization, a capability constrained by current net neutrality rules."
https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/fcc-s-plan-to-toss-net-neutrality-a-win-for-5g-analyst

I know what 5G is.  You will still be subject to data limits and caps imposed by the service provider.  We are not talking about capacity but access.  Doesn't matter if you have 15 lane freeway if you are only allowed to go 30 mph unless you pay extra.

And that has nothing to do with NN and home/business internet providers.  Ultimately, the repeal of NN means that I have to trust Cox and Comcast to do what is best for me, not their bottom line.  That is a pipe dream. 

I also don't know why you keep bringing up AT&T and TMobile...mobile internet is not subject to net neutrality rule.
https://www.marketplace.org/2017/12/14/tech/net-neutrality-gone-so-now-what-consumers

What are you talking about? MNOs are not exempted - they stand to benefit the most! Did you read the article? Here is another money excerpt from it that relates to your desire to get all OTT services delivered at the same speed without being required to pay more to the network owner/operator: "The requirement that a heart monitor transmission to a hospital emergency room cannot be treated as any more special than a cat video is absurd"

What are you talking about?  MNOs were exempt from the 2010 rules and they have operated largely without restrictions since 2015.  It is why Tmobile can offer to let you stream Netflix without eating into your data cap but watching YT will cost you mobile data.  We haven't even talked about throttling.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technol...ot-everyone-can-use-the-cloud-equally/421209/

MNO are also fundamentally different than home/business ISPs both in bandwidth capacity concerns and competition.  I can switch between tmobile, verizon, sprint, etc. right now and get basically the same coverage.  I have one choice for home ISP...Cox. 

Of course it can be treated special...your service providers just shouldn't be allowed charge you more.

 

[peppy]

The repeal of NN will be a huge job engine as now the Service Providers will have financial incentive to invest in their networks, and the downstream impact to the hardware and software companies that supply the platforms that power their networks will experience a new era of growth. Why would Broadcom invest R&D to implement advance features in new silicon if there is no market for those features due to onerous federal regulation?

Don' t drink the Kool-Aid - existing NN regulatory environment has been a drag on the economy.

Because all those advanced features still are needed  even with net neutrality.  QoS allows the management of the network to insure all services have adequate bandwidth.  QoS to throttle individual content sites is not a job engine and frankly is 1990s technology.

The problem with investment isn't the backbone network, it's the last mile network.

Hence, I have two providers.  And really, that's only recently.  Before that it was one.

Access network is low margin business for the network equipment vendors. 5G will be a huge disruption for many SPs and RAN vendors, and repeal of NN should accelerate the investment to transform the core and edge.

Those things are already happening because of the changing market and use of mobile devices. 

If anything, repeal of NN slows down that process because ISPs can more money on existing transmission methods.  The people who are starting 5G are the same people who are providing the home internet/wifi.

It doesn't sound like you're familiar with the changes in the architecture and who is driving what. Here is some material to educate yourself on 5G:
money paragraph: "5G will employ sophisticated mechanisms to handle different kinds of traffic flows, enabling 5G to address a wider range of use cases than prior technology generations, such as 3G and 4G,? he said in a statement. ?Many of the applications envisioned for 5G are of a control nature, needing minimal delay and high reliability. These applications will depend on traffic prioritization, a capability constrained by current net neutrality rules."
https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/fcc-s-plan-to-toss-net-neutrality-a-win-for-5g-analyst

I know what 5G is.  You will still be subject to data limits and caps imposed by the service provider.  We are not talking about capacity but access.  Doesn't matter if you have 15 lane freeway if you are only allowed to go 30 mph unless you pay extra.

And that has nothing to do with NN and home/business internet providers.  Ultimately, the repeal of NN means that I have to trust Cox and Comcast to do what is best for me, not their bottom line.  That is a pipe dream. 

I also don't know why you keep bringing up AT&T and TMobile...mobile internet is not subject to net neutrality rule.
https://www.marketplace.org/2017/12/14/tech/net-neutrality-gone-so-now-what-consumers

What are you talking about? MNOs are not exempted - they stand to benefit the most! Did you read the article? Here is another money excerpt from it that relates to your desire to get all OTT services delivered at the same speed without being required to pay more to the network owner/operator: "The requirement that a heart monitor transmission to a hospital emergency room cannot be treated as any more special than a cat video is absurd"

What are you talking about?  MNOs were exempt from the 2010 rules and they have operated largely without restrictions since 2015.  It is why Tmobile can offer to let you stream Netflix without eating into your data cap but watching YT will cost you mobile data.  We haven't even talked about throttling.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technol...ot-everyone-can-use-the-cloud-equally/421209/

MNO are also fundamentally different than home/business ISPs both in bandwidth capacity concerns and competition.  I can switch between tmobile, verizon, sprint, etc. right now and get basically the same coverage.  I have one choice for home ISP...Cox. 

Of course it can be treated special...your service providers just shouldn't be allowed charge you more.

You guys are not even considering the whole privacy aspect of this. Using the hospital/cat video as an example, the assumption is that the ISP will know what your content is and use that info as it choses (most likely, in ways that generate profit give that they can now share and sell the data). This is like sending a letter by mail, have the post office open the letter and read it, decide which needs to get delivered first, then make some notes in your personal file before putting it on a truck. The data on the personal file is then sold or shared. 

 

[sgip]

Internet privacy? To quote another: Privacy is an artificial construct, designed to fool the masses. There should never be an expectation of privacy on line. Even when it's offered, it's clear by now that the Government will override that guarantee. NN and the illusion of privacy can't be the issue.

I get bandwidth and throttling questions, but the good ship Privacy sailed many years ago.

SGIP

 

[Kings]

Internet privacy? To quote another: Privacy is an artificial construct, designed to fool the masses. There should never be an expectation of privacy on line. Even when it's offered, it's clear by now that the Government will override that guarantee. NN and the illusion of privacy can't be the issue.

I get bandwidth and throttling questions, but the good ship Privacy sailed many years ago.

SGIP

The more devices like Google Home and Alexa are normalized, the less privacy will be had.  Hell, all privacy has been gone since the rise of smart phones with two cameras and a microphone carried 24/7.

 

[usctrojancpa]

You want privacy, go live in the woods off the grid.  Otherwise accept that the world we live in has less and less privacy each day.

 

[Liar Loan]

?Internet Service Providers Should Not Be Able To Decide What People Can See Online,? Says Man Who Decides What People Can See Online

MENLO PARK, CA?Tech titan Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook, came out strongly against the repeal of net neutrality Friday, calling the rollback of the Obama-era regulation an ?injustice.?

?Internet Service Providers should not be able to decide what people can see online,? the man who decides what two billion people can see online every day said in a Facebook video that was placed in front of the precise amount of people he wished. ?It?s a violation of a free and open internet.?

?Furthermore, ISPs should not be able to charge more for certain content,? Zuckerberg intoned, though part of his $523 billion company?s revenue comes from throttling the reach of publishers? content unless the publisher pays Facebook to show their content to people who signed up to see it anyway.

The boss of the largest social network in the world, which is widely known to smother or close down conservative pages for violating what it calls its community guidelines, stressed that the fight for net neutrality is not over. ?We?re ready to work with members of Congress and others to help make the internet free and open for everyone.?

?All content should be treated equally,? he added, the slightest hint of a grin curling up the side of his mouth as the video ended.

http://babylonbee.com/news/internet...nline-says-man-decides-people-can-see-online/