Net Neutrality Lives! FCC will Classify the Internet Under Utility-Style Rules

I wonder if people would still feel as strongly as they did about netneut had netflix not been the face of it?

I think a lot more people would question the need and overreach without Netflix as the "smoking gun". Even seen comments like "they couldn't prove Comcast did anything so they found another way to screw 'em"...which is a great philosophy - let's invite the IRS to give everyone a proctology exam because we can't prove anything wrong was done.

pawn is right - this was basically a negotiating tactic with Netflix, Google and a few others....and now they are starting to wonder if they created a monster begging the govt to come in with its chainsaw.
 
Time will tell I guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cr6
Huh? I have the choice of AT&T and Comcast, plus DirectTv.

I don't know why, but AT&T Uverse is not considered a Cable Company. I lived in a city serviced by Cox. ATT came in and wired the neighborhood (and suddenly Cox gave us new channels for free, imagine that). Not Time Warner. Not Comcast. Because they aren't allowed. There are deals in place that state "XYZ Cable Company gets these zip codes". Very few areas have overlapping Cable Company coverage.
 
I don't know why, but AT&T Uverse is not considered a Cable Company. I lived in a city serviced by Cox. ATT came in and wired the neighborhood (and suddenly Cox gave us new channels for free, imagine that). Not Time Warner. Not Comcast. Because they aren't allowed. There are deals in place that state "XYZ Cable Company gets these zip codes". Very few areas have overlapping Cable Company coverage.
They are not considered a cable company because their service is delivered over DSL, a telecommunications service, not a cable/data service.

Their TV solution is IP based. If you have 45Mbps Uverse, a good 15Mbps is consumed every time you turn on the TV.
 
There are deals in place that state "XYZ Cable Company gets these zip codes". Very few areas have overlapping Cable Company coverage.

That's interesting. On one hand, it makes sense since there's a sizeable investment that needs to be recouped. But those limits to competition shouldn't be indefinite.

As I've said before, I'm not sure cable companies aren't largely sitting out fiber investment with wireless the obvious future. Spectrum was cited as a driving force in the AT&T/DirectTv merger, and Dish bought spectrum at the last auction. I have no idea what Comcast, RCN, TWC are planning, but it might be a strategic mistake to invest in a bunch of fiber when that tech could be obsolete in just 5-10 years.
 
That's interesting. On one hand, it makes sense since there's a sizeable investment that needs to be recouped. But those limits to competition shouldn't be indefinite.

As I've said before, I'm not sure cable companies aren't largely sitting out fiber investment with wireless the obvious future. Spectrum was cited as a driving force in the AT&T/DirectTv merger, and Dish bought spectrum at the last auction. I have no idea what Comcast, RCN, TWC are planning, but it might be a strategic mistake to invest in a bunch of fiber when that tech could be obsolete in just 5-10 years.

I am not a wireless expert, but I know a lot about wireless. Fiber is the future, not wireless, in my humble opinion. Assume wireless with be mostly consumer use, you would have very little left to backhaul it.

I fail to see wireless being the main proponent of the AT&T and DirecTV merger. AT&T owns enough spectrum on its own. I believe the main motivator is AT&T wanting to be your everything provider. Their Uverse TV offering is a failure for the most part. Acquiring DirecTV would just add to AT&T's portfolio of products. On the other hand , AT&T wants to be the leader of the IOT (Internet of Things).

Wireless will never be reliable enough to be a wireline replacement. You will still need fiber connections. I could be wrong, and maybe I am. But knowing what I know about wireless, there are too many variables that physics dictates cannot be changed.
 
Wireless will never be reliable enough to be a wireline replacement. You will still need fiber connections. I could be wrong, and maybe I am. But knowing what I know about wireless, there are too many variables that physics dictates cannot be changed.

Maybe. But I'm thinking mostly about the "last mile". The new repeaters (or whatever they're called) are very discrete, and especially in urban areas would go unnoticed without a good bit of effort to look for them.
 
Maybe. But I'm thinking mostly about the "last mile". The new repeaters (or whatever they're called) are very discrete, and especially in urban areas would go unnoticed without a good bit of effort to look for them.

Fair enough. I hope in 10-15 years I can get a fiber connection to my house. If everything in my house ran off wireless, it would make it really difficult to run my servers on such an unreliable connection, but I see your point.
 
Fair enough. I hope in 10-15 years I can get a fiber connection to my house. If everything in my house ran off wireless, it would make it really difficult to run my servers on such an unreliable connection, but I see your point.

I see your point. But when did I even get my first wifi router - 10 years ago? We've only had LTE for, what, 3-4 years? Where are those capabilities going to be in another 5-10 years?

I don't know about all the barriers and constraints you talk about, but I can't imagine they won't be overcome. For crying out loud, we can CHARGE devices wirelessly now - that really blows my mind.
 
Let's assume that in the US, we won't give the current major wireless carriers now all available spectrum from 0Hz to 80Ghz. Let's assume that as things stand now, the armed forces, NOAA, FAA, and other various wireless spectrum holders will not give up all of their spectrum, there will not be enough to go around for as many wireless devices as you think. That is the primary reason we have four major wireless carriers in the US. As certain industries fade away (look in to TV White Space) or are merged in to others, the FCC can reclaim the spectrum or wait for the licences to expire. Then it will get sold. There is still not enough spectrum to cover everything, everywhere, with wireless devices.

There is much more to it than that, but wire line will always be preferable to wireless until we can find a way to speak to each other and share information with brainwaves. Then we won't have the need for vocal chords.
 
Agree, plus with wireless you have to take in account the materials used in the building as well as other interference where you get less of that with wired. I personally preferred wired with the option of creating my own wireless solution via router. Wired means for the most part I will always have connection unless something happened at the source where wireless I have another link in the chain I have to deal with and troubleshoot to why I am not able to get online.
 
I am so nuts about being wired. Just recently, we replaced two dual copper lines from our office to our servers. Gig router with SFP to another Gig router with SFP. With the amount of data being transferred interoffice, it made a difference. Pulling large backups from servers made a huge difference.

But that kind of data transfer is becoming more and more prevalent. Wired is best simply because 802.11 (read WiFi) does not have much in way of interference mitigation. And as it goes with WiFi, you're only as strong as your weakest link. Mu-MIMO will help with this, but ultimately the protocol isn't designed to work that great in noisy environments.
 
Reads like mostly lip service to what the average person thought the issue was. Basically, doing business as usual while pretending they're doing more than in the past.

Enjoyed the money line about Netflix and interconnection fees.

Some of it is. I am waiting to see what my boss has to say about it. After talking with lawyers familiar with tech and internet law have to say about it.

Also keep in mind that it still has to be put in the register. Then large companies like Verizon, AT&T, Comcast and TWC can file their lawsuits. It will sit in litigation for a little bit. There are things that will happen before it actually becomes law.
 
Back
Top