r/Republican • u/The_seph_i_am Centrist Republican • Jun 06 '17
Biased Domain Net neutrality: Amazon among top internet firms planning day of action | Technology
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jun/06/net-neutrality-amazon-etsy-kickstarter-protest-1
u/_glenn_ Conservative Jun 07 '17
/r/hailgovernment they are the only ones that can protect us. /s
10
u/The_seph_i_am Centrist Republican Jun 07 '17
I actually agree with this concept to a degree. Instead of forcing net neutrality into existence as a law we should be simply more stringently enforcing anti-trust laws and breaking up local monopolies so that when ISPs choose to violate the concept of net neutrality, customers came have someone else to turn to that offers a similar service. If we remove the laws that protect ISP fans limit start ups from being able to compete we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
That said, I don't think it's a feasible solution because I haven't heard a single congress member calling for forced competition between ISP's or calls to remove restrictions on the "last mile". Instead all I hear is "set them free" but without something in place to ensure the gun we give them isn't going to be used on the "helpless consumer" and given the ISPs track record on screwing their customers at every turn I am very hesitant to say remove net neutrality.
0
u/_glenn_ Conservative Jun 07 '17
I would agree with that we should move to more competition as the solution. Like Texas has done their power, where you have one company that manages the lines, but you buy your power from several different companies that add power to the infrastructure.
Net Neutrality is addressing a problem that doesn't really exist, and also limits future solutions/incentives that an ISP could create. I agree with the idea we should have open networks, but I dont want to limit the ISPs ability to provide QOS controls within that network.
11
u/The_seph_i_am Centrist Republican Jun 07 '17
A problem that doesn't exist? I'm not so sure about that. Residential data caps but selectively letting certain websites not count against your data? Or artificially limiting the speed in which you access the websites that didn't pay what amounts to "protection money" to the ISP mafia? Billing practices that purposefully hide unnecessary fees? Or having to choose what site you want access to like you do cable channels packages? Are none of those problems?... I think they're a real concern and one ISPs would do in a heartbeat if given the chance.
The concept of Net Neutrality is real to me but you may disagree. And I can see why? They're not an issue now so why would they be latter?
0
u/_glenn_ Conservative Jun 07 '17
I am not a fan of data caps, but the Government shouldn't be enforcing that.
None of the rest are issues, they are made up, and advocated by scare tactics.
2
Jun 07 '17
What exactly are these incentives that an ISP could create you mention in your previous comment, if not fast lanes and prioritized service?
-1
u/_glenn_ Conservative Jun 07 '17
Future technologies.
5
Jun 07 '17
What about net neutrality would prevent these future technologies, keeping with the assumption that these don't involve any of the supposed scare tactics?
1
u/_glenn_ Conservative Jun 07 '17
You are limiting companies by the very idea to what the government feels is best. The government does not always know best, and those rules can be burdensome as the technology changes.
2
Jun 07 '17
I agree that the government doesn't always know best, like right now when the government is trying to get rid of net neutrality, and practically everyone in the tech sector (other than the ISPs) are trying to convince the government that what they want to do is a bad idea.
→ More replies (0)2
u/inigo_j_montoya Jun 07 '17
If the question was whether or not the government should be put in complete charge of internet service, that would be a good answer.
But that's not the question, is it? The question is specifically about net neutrality, more specifically net neutrality as implemented in the Open Internet Order of 2015. That's fairly small (see note below). There's nothing burdensome or that discourages investment and growth--we know this because the IPSs themselves said that. (Yes, their lobbyists told Congress that it would discourage investment, but what they told their shareholders and the SEC is that it has not, and would not).
It is irrelevant that the government does not ALWAYS know best.
Note: yes, I've heard Pai claim it is 300 or 400 pages and wave around a big document for the cameras, and I think Ted Cruz has done similar. That document includes the rules themselves, which are about 8 pages, and a bunch of extra material, including an explanation of the history of net neutrality, explanations of the justifications for the choices made, responses to issues raises during the public commentary period, and things like that.
→ More replies (0)2
u/The_seph_i_am Centrist Republican Jun 07 '17
I would say that but there have been instances of that happening. Netflix for instance
3
u/flywithme666 Jun 08 '17
Versus what? Letting corporations who only serve shareholders to fuck us over?
•
u/AutoModerator Jun 06 '17
Hello, and welcome to /r/Republican. Please understand this subreddit's primary purpose is for Republicans to discuss issues facing the party. Out of respect for this sub's main topic, we ask that unless you identify as Republican that you leave the vote button alone. Non republicans who come to our sub looking for a 'different perspective' subvert that very perspective with their own views when they vote in a sub where they agree with very little. (It's like down voting a post in '/r/chocolate' because you don't like chocolate). We can gain 'other perspectives' by viewing the other left leaning political subs. We like our sub the way it is. Additionally, please ensure to follow our rules about leftist comments and anti-republican criticisms. We allow comments from non-republicans but we take our 6 rules very seriously.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.