• The Beginning of the End, AT&T capitalizing on death of net neutrality
    124 replies, posted
[quote]Torrent Freak notes that AT&T Mobility filed a patent (US 20140010082) on September 2013 for a system that would allow the wireless carrier to charge a subscriber more money for using file sharing, video, other other more intensive bandwidth services. Titled the "Prevention Of Bandwidth Abuse Of A Communications System", the patent operates on a credit system, whereby users erode their credit total by using select types of content and services.[/quote] Source: [url]http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/ATT-Patents-Concept-to-Detect-Charge-More-For-Certain-Traffic-127559[/url] Link to Patent: [url]https://www.google.com/patents/US20140010082[/url]
you poor yanks are fucked
please don't. The consequences of killing net neutrality will be massive and uncontrollable. There will be anarchy, I just know it.
[QUOTE=Ruski v2.0;43765897]you poor yanks are fucked[/QUOTE] How's that porn filter coming along?
And then everyone dropped AT&T and changed ISPs
Thank god I don't have AT&T
[QUOTE=FunnyStarRunner;43765935]How's that porn filter coming along?[/QUOTE] [img]http://puu.sh/6I0zN.png[/img]
[QUOTE=erfinjerfin;43765943]And then everyone dropped AT&T and changed ISPs[/QUOTE] and then every other ISP followed AT&Ts example because in all reality they are the same company in effect. it's a self managed divided monopoly
And that's one of the reasons why the EU is great [url]http://gigaom.com/2014/01/23/net-neutrality-just-got-a-boost-in-europe-thanks-to-a-consumer-rights-committee/[/url]
It's worth pointing out that the reason the FCC's net neutrality rules died was not because the courts think net neturality is a crock of shit, but because the FCC screwed up. Simply put, in the 90s, the FCC had to decide whether it was going to classify the big ISPs like Comcast and Verizon as common carriers, or as content providers, as they were offering both (cable TV service as well as telecommunications infrastructure access). It decided to classify them as [I]content providers[/I]. Fast forward some years to when the FCC is drafting its net neutrality rules; these rules apply to [I]common carriers[/I], like ISPs, which gives them the safe harbour provisions that protect them against being held liable for customers committing music piracy/etc. but requires that they essentially be a neutral transport network. The FCC constructed its rules to apply to the content-provider-classed ISPs. The court did the only thing it could do when it encountered this obvious, fatal conflict: throw them out so the FCC can do it properly. If the FCC wants to regulate the ISPs as common carriers, and therefore hold them to net neutrality standards, it needs to reclassify them as common carriers, and then reinstate the old rules or write better ones. Or write net-neutrality rules for content providers and brace for a long court fight because fuck 'em. Regulating content providers with net neutrality would also set a very ugly precedent for Google to deal with, since its search algorithm would then have to be "neutral", or dumber than a bucket of rocks because the whole point of the algorithm is that it's becoming increasingly selective based on what it thinks is relevant to what you [I]want[/I].
Aw fuck I have AT&T shit shit shit
[QUOTE=FunnyStarRunner;43765935]How's that porn filter coming along?[/QUOTE] Will there be a net neutrality on/off switch in the settings? [img]http://imgkk.com/i/m1vb.png[/img]
will this effect foreigners connecting to websites within usa?
looks like they're getting close to reaching that point where their greed is going to be their downfall
And my dad still works for AT&T ever since Bell South got absorbed...
This is just all sorts of bad news should it go through.
[QUOTE=Krzystylez;43766040]will this effect foreigners connecting to websites within usa?[/QUOTE] It [I]shouldn't[/I] unless the links your traffic is flowing through are being meddled with by the bastards no matter where it's coming from or going to.
Why is america so shitty when it comes to mobile/internet?
[QUOTE=Scot;43766122]Why is america so shitty when it comes to mobile/internet?[/QUOTE] Because businessmen that are in seats of power see golden geese, and rather than just letting them lay eggs, they butcher it in hopes of getting more.
[QUOTE=Kegan;43766146]Because businessmen that are in seats of power see golden geese, and rather than just letting them lay eggs, they butcher it in hopes of getting more.[/QUOTE] Sociopaths run big business. That's the heart of the problem.
1's and 0's are 1's and 0's. It shouldn't matter what form they take or where they come from. "Charge more for more bandwidth"? Don't they [I]already do that[/I]? Oh wait, what they have now doesn't arbitrarily decide whether certain bytes should cost more or less, sorry. FCC, please hurry up in stopping shit like this.
[QUOTE=Scot;43766122]Why is america so shitty when it comes to mobile/internet?[/QUOTE] If this was LMAO Pics, I'd be dropping lods of emone stuff everywhere here. Yeah. Money. Net neutrality means they can't charge Netflix twice for the bandwidth it uses streaming video to you. Netflix pays their CDN hosters/links to the backbone for the upload bandwidth, and the ISPs would like to charge them for the cost of [I]handling[/I] that bandwidth as their customers cut the cord (which means [I]less money for the ISPs who are also offering cable TV and phone[/I]) and fire up Netflix after dinner. Guess what they'd do to Microsoft since Skype means being able to ditch your landline and the audio codecs are concentrated on best quality possible, not minimal bandwidth. It also means they can't do this kind of shit, where bandwidth is unreasonably expensive for arbitrary (profit) reasons. Too bad the FCC screwed up. They're greedy fucks and they've got Congress in their pocket by plowing millions into lobbyists, allowing them to make the laws even more relaxed, giving them even more lobbying power and abusive profit opportunity.
Here's hoping it gives rise to an internet company that isn't full of greedy fucks and the others lose their business.
So if you pay for 60mbit/s internet and decide to use all of said bandwidth, are you abusing it or just using what you paid for?
[QUOTE=Thomo_UK;43766238]Here's hoping it gives rise to an internet company that isn't full of greedy fucks and the others lose their business.[/QUOTE] it would be pretty "niche" unless they do some crazy good advertising
People who don't know shit about the internet should not be making decisions regarding the internet
[QUOTE=Thomo_UK;43766238]Here's hoping it gives rise to an internet company that isn't full of greedy fucks and the others lose their business.[/QUOTE] Considering which ISP you use is based on your geographic location, it will mean very little. Even if it did somehow happen. Our only hope is the FCC fixing their screwup. Until then, we are at their mercy.
This is why I am glad I am not using internet in the america right now. Here is to all the Americans your communications people can fix what they have inadvertently started.
[QUOTE=Thomo_UK;43766238]Here's hoping it gives rise to an internet company that isn't full of greedy fucks and the others lose their business.[/QUOTE] Google Fiber just [I]might[/I] need to happen on a large scale, even though Google probably doesn't want to actually get into the business of being an ISP because that involves a massive customer support framework, and Google's had trouble with that in the past as-is. The problem with becoming big now is, you either need to go to the trouble of building out a whole new layer of infrastructure, or you're paying the big telcos and cable companies for access and reselling it. The big guys are where they are because they were paid by the US government to build out the telecommunications grid; they were basically subsidized to put up all the poles and string it all along. The big ISPs have even managed to successfully [I]defeat[/I] municipalities' attempts to build their own fiber network because the ISP's decided that the town isn't profitable enough to even put up cable/DSL wire on the poles. In court. Google owns a few zillion miles of dark (unused) fiber across the US, though, and it could have insane bandwidth if it was able to light it all up.
I went through all the pain to setup a server, and to hear this is a big piss off.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.