General Discussion

jeff47

(26,549 posts)

295. Read more closely.

Wed May 28, 2014, 11:14 AM

May 2014

The FCC can put ISPs under the same rules as telephone service, and ensure net neutrality.

The problem is those rules are designed over breadth of service, not speed.

The way ISPs currently upgrade their service is by competing for people who pay for very high speed service. Time Warner used to offer 50Mbps service for a crapload of money. Most people wouldn't pay the cost, but a few people will. That causes Time Warner to upgrade their network to handle the service. Which causes AT&T to upgrade their network to compete for those same high-profit people.

Once both networks have been upgraded, they start offering faster service to everyone. That really expensive Time Warner service recently changed to 100Mbps, while my "regular" service went from 10Mbps to 15Mbps for the same price I was already paying.

The telephone rules don't let the ISPs play that game. Which is why our plain old telephone service got upgraded every 40 years. We already have the slowest Internet service in the developed world. We don't want to make that worse.

Additionally, the "fast lane" proposal was limited to a 20% boost - non-fast-lane could run no slower than 80% of the top speed. If "normal" Internet service goes from 10Mbps to 100Mbps that's a huge win for all of us, even with that fast lane crap - 80Mbps is a huge boost over 10Mbps. Is that likely? Hell if I know. There's too many people spewing crap everywhere to find a reasonable analysis of likely speed effects.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

410 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

CUT THE CRAP! Your Month in Review from the most "progressive" administration ever. [View all] woo me with science May 2014 OP

K&R Puzzledtraveller May 2014 #1

you are contributing to the meh attitude that has the president worried about Nov Doctor_J May 2014 #2

I would say the President is contributing to the "meh" attitude, not the poster. CaliforniaPeggy May 2014 #4

Nah, the poster is doing a lovely job of blaming the President for jeff47 May 2014 #5

It's pretty much all the poster ever does...nt SidDithers May 2014 #11

Closer to exclusively. nt Bobbie Jo May 2014 #26

THE BUCK STOPS HERE blkmusclmachine May 2014 #223

+10,000 nt okaawhatever May 2014 #356

And yet, you cannot refute anything in the OP. Or maybe you can, so I'll wait, before deciding sabrina 1 May 2014 #370

well, then you and your fellow ____ here can point out which stupidicus May 2014 #41

So are you saying that the OP is making it all up? Or that some or all of the complaints arent rhett o rick May 2014 #89

The usual. Autumn May 2014 #218

Wow that's a dumb post. jeff47 May 2014 #284

Why dont you simplify your responses here to, "None of it's the fault of the President."? nm rhett o rick May 2014 #299

Because some of them are the fault of the President jeff47 May 2014 #306

What debate? Those that support the president are never seen in any of the threads rhett o rick May 2014 #310

Speaking for myself, I have little to contribute to those threads. randome May 2014 #316

I can understand when one doesnt participate, but when the whole rhett o rick May 2014 #326

Most of those horrible mistakes are on Obama's shoulders. JDPriestly May 2014 #106

That's about the only item on the list that is not Obama's responsibility, sole responsibility. JDPriestly May 2014 #116

Is there such a thing as Executive Orders anymore? I know Bush used them 'liberally'. sabrina 1 May 2014 #165

So you want Obama to be a dictator. jeff47 May 2014 #285

BS Strawman bvar22 May 2014 #323

So you think Reid is ignoring the President then? You want a Democratic President to be powerless? sabrina 1 May 2014 #324

"So you want Obama to be a dictator," is the sign of desperation. rhett o rick May 2014 #330

And you had the nerve to post that after calling someone else's post stupid? merrily May 2014 #353

Exactly! He should arrestt those that commit war crimes, and Constitutional crimes! grahamhgreen May 2014 #372

I guess you missed all the items that begin, "The White House," "The Administration" "Obama" or merrily May 2014 #354

sorry cp. so few of my post are NOT sarcastic that I no longer mark those Doctor_J May 2014 #13

Me too. Is making it ballyhoo May 2014 #37

Too bad we don't all have your boomer sense... SidDithers May 2014 #78

NO MORE "THIRD WAY" blkmusclmachine May 2014 #224

Do you ever post anything other than this kind of shite? How do you feel about the rhett o rick May 2014 #236

... SidDithers May 2014 #237

Ah....the usual corporate dogs only comeback LiberalLovinLug May 2014 #246

... SidDithers May 2014 #258

Results of Jury service Paolo123 May 2014 #290

Excellent, thanks... SidDithers May 2014 #307

Yet, your first post on this thread was an ad hom and nothing else. merrily May 2014 #359

... LiberalLovinLug May 2014 #309

If he posts anything besides ad homs and smilies, I've been missing all the posts merrily May 2014 #357

please explain what you mean by 'boomer' sense navarth May 2014 #243

Wow, the old right wing attack on the perceived 'boomer', translation 'liberal'. Why would any sabrina 1 May 2014 #371

It says a lot about the routine level of Third Way engagement here that you took the post as serious woo me with science May 2014 #15

Oh So Helpless! Phlem May 2014 #31

Yes - so helpless that he can decapitate the Libyan government with air strikes Maedhros May 2014 #53

that's why I never liked Poes: de facto they only redouble the amount of fundie nonsense MisterP May 2014 #210

So true, 'they are left with attempts to smear the messenger and ludicrous protests that the sabrina 1 May 2014 #358

Totally agree. Like so many others (!) I was snookered by the wonderful Obama rhetoric in 2007. Peregrine Took May 2014 #315

Boxes in your garage? Armstead May 2014 #48

Obama has made terrible decisions in his appointments. This is a big country. JDPriestly May 2014 #99

He's not a king! But....which US Presidents were kings? Yet, they got big things done. merrily May 2014 #381

Alert billhicks76 May 2014 #118

Whole reply was sarcasm Doctor_J May 2014 #123

Ahh billhicks76 May 2014 #235

Bwah! woo me with science May 2014 #292

Sorry. I thought the veterans and especially the old school Dems were all familiar with my politics Doctor_J May 2014 #297

I thought it was perfect. woo me with science May 2014 #318

Disturbing. historylovr May 2014 #3

Any guess what that "D" stands for??? I know he hangs around with Christian Dominionists, but that'd blkmusclmachine May 2014 #225

I used to think I knew the answer, but now I know merrily May 2014 #362

If only Mitt had won the election... randys1 May 2014 #6

That's not really the point. Mitt did NOT win, Obama did. Maedhros May 2014 #56

Where to begin... randys1 May 2014 #61

Not quite. Maedhros May 2014 #69

strawman MY ASS randys1 May 2014 #83

I think you are personalizing this too much Armstead May 2014 #85

Exact opposite, half of his country almost has made it ONLY about Obama and randys1 May 2014 #156

I was being polite with you. You respond with insults. Maedhros May 2014 #108

It is an insult to say "My ass" in a response to your post? randys1 May 2014 #157

With one exception, every item listed in the OP is the result of one of Obama's appointments JDPriestly May 2014 #124

So why did he run for president BrotherIvan May 2014 #175

Good questions. CanSocDem May 2014 #396

Baloney. No asked him to reverse 200 years of problems. And it's a meme that a liberal cant get to merrily May 2014 #363

Because the other would have been worse, the worst shit from our guy is the new norm. Ed Suspicious May 2014 #66

When you weigh the real differences in so many areas, of course. randys1 May 2014 #67

Real change will not come until people stop giving bad politicians a pass Maedhros May 2014 #70

Fuck the party, has nothing to do with that randys1 May 2014 #72

I agree, now you point me to anyone capable of being President who is better randys1 May 2014 #400

Yes, Carlin called it. But I also need to point out that Jackpine Radical May 2014 #73

And, they think he should fix everything that has been broken for 200 yrs randys1 May 2014 #81

Nope. Pushing to fast-track TPP is not a failing of 200 year old policy. TPP is a today policy and Ed Suspicious May 2014 #88

Thank you. JDPriestly May 2014 #128

LOL Egnever May 2014 #131

I know, it is a problem, big one... randys1 May 2014 #154

It is the president who pissed off the young liberals Doctor_J May 2014 #287

Not really randys1 May 2014 #313

Was the existence of Blue Dogs and filibusters a surprise to Senator/Candidate Obama? merrily May 2014 #379

I look forward to the constant barrage of criticism from ALL, 100% of posters randys1 May 2014 #399

Yes. He promised hope and change. I've lost hope and change has not come. JDPriestly May 2014 #127

How does he close it if he cant move the prisoners anywhere? randys1 May 2014 #153

He's commander-in-chief ... GeorgeGist May 2014 #170

WHERE does he put the prisoners? randys1 May 2014 #187

Just keep taking everything he says and everything that happens in D.C. at face value. merrily May 2014 #384

So you dont know, do you. randys1 May 2014 #397

This Liberalynn May 2014 #82

We have too many parties, not too few. I think we have at least 23 parties to the left of Democrats, merrily May 2014 #366

To my disappointment, even John Stewart is going that route. merrily May 2014 #375

That's really a desperate argument. You seem to intimate that we should accept anything rhett o rick May 2014 #90

Nonsense, I criticize Obama all the time, you are not looking at the big picture i am afraid randys1 May 2014 #159

Yes, and the OP is going to cause the death of all that's good on earth and in heaven, too. merrily May 2014 #386

I canNOT keep up around here LOL randys1 May 2014 #398

That is conjecture. We don't know what would have happened if Romney had won. JDPriestly May 2014 #121

Using bad stuff rMoney might have done pscot May 2014 #194

Oh the old.. sendero May 2014 #380

K&R x 100000000000 SamKnause May 2014 #7

Only Nixon could go to China? Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #12

Wow. You must be worried about something. randome May 2014 #8

Clearly woo is "worried" wavesofeuphoria May 2014 #27

Because it sounds like shrillness instead of a thoughtful post. randome May 2014 #34

Kinda like when "The List" is posted, huh? 1000words May 2014 #43

Except I think woome actually put the OP list together herself, rather than copying and pasting. merrily May 2014 #377

So how about offering -- in a civil way -- some of those differing interpretations? Armstead May 2014 #86

Pick one. How about seeking immunity for telecom companies that hand over data? randome May 2014 #101

Me. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #110

It's a slippery slope when you say corporations can ignore legal warrants, though. randome May 2014 #120

My problem is with 'secret' activities in that vein. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #206

I agree with the secrecy part. We need more transparency. randome May 2014 #221

I see it as belonging at the top of that list dreamnightwind May 2014 #256

So, Immunity was needed because some prosecutor was going to charge the corporations with merrily May 2014 #378

How 'bout for cash? jeff47 May 2014 #298

That shouldn't be legal either. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #319

I'll grant you that one is open to intrpretation. But you miss my point. Armstead May 2014 #112

Agree with you there. randome May 2014 #125

Could you please elaborate on just what the "different light" might be on each point? JDPriestly May 2014 #130

Telecom immunity, for one. See above. randome May 2014 #151

Yes, clearly Greenwald is to blame for people's disillusionment Distant Quasar May 2014 #39

Or HAARP. LOL. JDPriestly May 2014 #132

as opposed to the one whose only observable expertise stupidicus May 2014 #42

So what is the subject? Obama is an awful President? randome May 2014 #71

right stupidicus May 2014 #163

I said I don't disagree with some of the points made. randome May 2014 #193

no, you're merely slip-sliding away from stupidicus May 2014 #345

Greenwald Effect? Do you mean Greenwald's being against cutting Social Security? MannyGoldstein May 2014 #196

I'm thinking that some of S&G's diehard supporters are starting to come to grips... randome May 2014 #219

Excellent OP. Le Taz Hot May 2014 #9

I love threads like this MohRokTah May 2014 #10

It certainly signals a problem when lists of the President's own policies have that effect. nt woo me with science May 2014 #17

the heads in the sand crowd Skittles May 2014 #28

Yup. Best not to engage with commercials that rewrite history. woo me with science May 2014 #29

ahhhhhhhh the Tiger Beat crowd Skittles May 2014 #30

There's one less believer you have to deal with. Phlem May 2014 #33

Testing, testing. Jackpine Radical May 2014 #76

Cool.... daleanime May 2014 #150

President Obama Leme May 2014 #14

when TPP passes will you relent? Doctor_J May 2014 #18

"We're in trouble"....ain't that the truth... truebrit71 May 2014 #22

well Leme May 2014 #24

It won't pass under Obama with this congress. joshcryer May 2014 #234

Ultimately, I agree. Laelth May 2014 #46

If he sits back and lets Comcast take over the Internet, and he'll be ahead of Clinton Armstead May 2014 #87

Clinton. Glass-Steagall. tea and oranges May 2014 #96

True -- Except the Kid Gloves and the Gifts to Big Banks and Wall St. since 2008 come close Armstead May 2014 #100

Agree! Clinton totally set it up tea and oranges May 2014 #117

The good cop ship may have sailed, if it ever existed. merrily May 2014 #392

The Good Ship Cop? tea and oranges May 2014 #402

No one ever expects Democratic Presidents to be in that kind of competition. Also, merrily May 2014 #364

Tough call. Jackpine Radical May 2014 #77

So true. But these young'uns can't remember Eisenhower and did not learn about him JDPriestly May 2014 #134

Check out the 1956 Republican Party Platform Deny and Shred May 2014 #282

The audacity of politics as usual. Tierra_y_Libertad May 2014 #16

The Audacity of Sellout. Jackpine Radical May 2014 #138

Over on Disc, someone posted a graphic that stated Obama's wealth went from CrispyQ May 2014 #19

Source? I wouldn't be surprised by this news, but I need to see a link to the source Maedhros May 2014 #59

A lot of that was from book sales during his Presidential runs Dr Hobbitstein May 2014 #65

I hadn't seen all of these stories - thanks for the roundup Distant Quasar May 2014 #20

You forgot the Walmart photo-op. Also another one popped up today. in Geithner's new book Doctor_J May 2014 #21

"I never felt comfortable playing a populist." woo me with science May 2014 #25

We dun bin Jackpine Radical May 2014 #79

"playing" BrotherIvan May 2014 #40

Yeah, I am onto that now Doctor_J May 2014 #55

Statistically, any Democrat would have won in 2008 BrotherIvan May 2014 #109

He's Feyd Rautha. Maedhros May 2014 #60

A kinder, gentler oligarchy BrotherIvan May 2014 #103

yep...plus he is black noiretextatique May 2014 #169

and? Bobbie Jo May 2014 #308

historic change noiretextatique May 2014 #320

Yes. That is the sickest statement attributed to the President. JDPriestly May 2014 #136

Much to his relief he's in a second term and can quit the act. pa28 May 2014 #213

No rest for the weary. It's Presidential Library and legacy time. merrily May 2014 #389

Omigod, he really said that? Raksha May 2014 #350

Well, according to Geithner anyway Doctor_J May 2014 #351

So Obama's dictator then? jeff47 May 2014 #23

Thank you for one of the few posts on this thread that shows knowledge of civics. I see the OP msanthrope May 2014 #49

Yea, for civics 101.. giftedgirl77 May 2014 #63

^ THIS ^ mac56 May 2014 #74

It was actually Leahy who returned to teh practice of blue slipping nominees, not Reid. MohRokTah May 2014 #80

Fixed, thanks. (nt) jeff47 May 2014 #296

RE:Internet Armstead May 2014 #93

No, those aren't our two choices. jeff47 May 2014 #288

Those are the basic two choices Armstead May 2014 #302

Keeping the Internet slow, but "available to all" jeff47 May 2014 #312

Where I live the government did just that Armstead May 2014 #314

hmmmm Leme May 2014 #133

Because he isn't in Congress. jeff47 May 2014 #289

my point is that Leme May 2014 #349

The bad decisions were made by Obama appointees. JDPriestly May 2014 #143

Historical materialism is a farce. joshcryer May 2014 #239

The government should fund the roads and the basic internet structure. JDPriestly May 2014 #254

The House decides taxes. joshcryer May 2014 #255

The President sends the budget to Congress, though. Yes, they say yea or nay, but merrily May 2014 #361

The President has the most progressive budgets in history. joshcryer May 2014 #365

I don't agree. The very first budget he sent to Congress cut fuel subsidies for the poor. merrily May 2014 #368

LIHEAP had doubled in the year prior. joshcryer May 2014 #373

I disagree. merrily May 2014 #374

If your plan was going to work, it already would have worked. jeff47 May 2014 #291

What are your sources, your links for these statements? JDPriestly May 2014 #339

Every one of these outrages has an explanation treestar May 2014 #176

The Republicans have good explanations too Armstead May 2014 #303

Wrong...the FCC has the power to reclassify ISPs Maven May 2014 #177

Changing the early adopter mechanism would require Congress. joshcryer May 2014 #233

If consumer complaints were going to work, they already would have. jeff47 May 2014 #301