|
it means ensuring the status quo for the most part, op
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 10:11 |
|
|
pointsofdata posted:I kinda agree that Netflix have been dicks but don't really want to be on the same side of an argument as Verizon or cremnob netflix was just really dumb because the ceo guy thought he could save some money. they've always been irrelevant to the fcc's decision making though, the fcc determined the stuff that happened didn't violate any current or planned regs
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
LP0 ON FIRE posted:it's not that netflix have been dicks really, it's just doing away with competition with other services. services that allow netflix will surely win over if it's popular enough to use nobody "wasn't allowing netflix" netflix just refused to follow standard internet procedures used worldwide.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
LP0 ON FIRE posted:i know i'm saying if net neutrality didn't exist and rules against services blocking sites and stuff were a lot more lax yeah but nobody was going to block them regardless, is the thing. other than discount mobile isps, like how metropcs used to do before tmo bought them lol
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
uncurable mlady posted:if shaggar, fishmech, stymie, verizon, and att are against something then you know it must be the best loving thing since sliced bread so I am v pleased with today's news i'm not against it, moron.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
uncurable mlady posted:quantum goalposts, observing their placement causes them to change state i have never opposed net neutrality
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:public networks aren't companies and are instead called "public services" which tend to have a bit more transparency and accountability than some corporate stockholders' board nah a lot of municipalities really do have a bad habit of making them private companies once the network's built. especially when the initial structure is a co-op.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 22:51
|
|
|
Beeftweeter posted:how much of that was actually invested into real internet infrastructure, not wireless bullshit the wireless poo poo is why the countryside has coverage with cell phones at all
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
Beeftweeter posted:so? idgaf if the countryside has cell coverage, their wireline service is subsidized and i would bet that money is factored into their "infrastructure investment" costs even though they didnt pay a goddamn penny of it you should give a gently caress, considering you do need to travel through the countryside to get between cities. also yall need to keep in mind that the 90s funding was based on a definition of broadband where 200 kilobits was broadband and 1.5 megabit was super fast broadband. if it had been built exactly as intended then the countryside woulda had a whole bunch of slowass internet infrastructure and even worse cell coverage CrazyLittle posted:no, the average speed available to most buildings in san francisco is still adsl 6-10mbps down / 768-1500kbps up. that's because the city services lines (gas/power) are so old and not buried to modern code depths that they can't just trench new fiber everywhere without risking major incidents. lol san francisco is trash hell -sent from my 125/15 cable connection in literal appalachia
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:oh so they're going to prevent stuff that has never happened from happening? cause it sounds like they're trying to classify legitimate peering arrangements like the Netflix thing as bad which would be hilariously stupid. so its a good thing they're not doing that. attention shaggar: the fcc rules basically mean enforcing the current status quo
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 01:10
|
|
|
Beeftweeter posted:so really not any different than today precisely
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
CrazyLittle posted:iirc all this poo poo started when level3 underbid comcast for the cdn contract with netflix, which meant that comcast would have had to start paying level3 for the peering disparity as well as upgrade their peering links, and in response comcast throttled netflix for ~1month. and then shtf no, level 3 would have had to start paying comcast if they wanted the peering upgraded, comcast was never on the hook for paying peering charges. side that pushes more traffic pays. and there was no throttling at comcast, just the natural congestion. verizon is the one that reputedly actually throttled.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
CrazyLittle posted:you're contradicting yourself here. which is it? is level3 paying comcast or is comcast paying level3? currently it's neither, netflix stopped being dumb, the traffic went back to equal enough to not pay, and they both just pay for their side's upkeep
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 02:18
|
|
|
DaNzA posted:or if fios was unbundled then you can just get another ISP using the same fios line with less congestion on the backend it's also up to the person selling connectivity on netflix's side to provide the actual access, friend.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
DaNzA posted:true, but in cases like people getting much improved speed when they VPN out of their isp means there are most likely some uncongested peering points out there that customers can get to if there's a choice in switching ISP that's a thing that's up to the massive bandwidth pushing on the other end signing deals with more other companies or signing a deal with the isp itself, tbh when you push 35% of a continent's bandwidth at peak times like netflix, going for a single transit network for most of your traffic is just plain dumb.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 02:34
|
|
|
suffix posted:the isps should be offering it for free since it saves them money, but they want to save money and be paid for it too because monopoly no, they should charge the normal rates for rackspace and power like they do now
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 02:37
|
|
|
Beeftweeter posted:nevermind that they were literally paid more money than lots of companies earn in 5 years to do this by the government and just never did it they ran the fiber to cell towers, fiber that's still being used ti handle 3g and even 4g to this day
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
Beeftweeter posted:thats not what it was meant for it was meant for providing 200 kilobit data service to outlying areas. cell phones do that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
Beeftweeter posted:it doesnt matter, it specifically was not meant for that. you can say that they're equivalent but if you paid billions of dollars for a blue 900 ft tall samsung galaxy s8 (that is the standard size, do not ask about the plus model) and got a curved 850 ft red one you would probably be mad and ask for an exchange, then alao get mad when they ask for more money because they already built the thing you didnt ask for the thing you're not getting is that the fiber was in fact built, and the money given out was frankly given out with extremely loose terms and a very low level of service expected. the thing actually provided met the requirements, and the thing they were "supposed" to provide would still have already been unacceptably slow as wireline service very soon. (because do you seriously think they were required to provide fiver from the town nodes to the homes? no. it woulda been plain copper)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 03:52
|
|
|
computer parts posted:finland* agrees *10 megabit may be provided over high latency satellite Beeftweeter posted:incidentally thats their plan now with adsl2 or whatever its called. fiber to the node and then dsl the rest of the way you don't think the rural companies they'd have sold it off too wouldn't have raised speeds? hell there's places you can go now that did this exact stuff back then and they're still offering like 11.5 mbit at best and speaking of adsl2 it doesn't handle distance very well at all. and rural nodes are quite far away...
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 03:58
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:the post office should handle the internet and also be your local public bank/credit union only if we can kill the whole pseudo-private corporation thing once and for all and start funding it with taxes again. else it's a one way ticket to privatization.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 04:55
|
|
|
SYSV Fanfic posted:wtf shaggar. Please explain how this is remotely possible in markets with competition? or even without competition, really.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 01:56
|
|
|
SYSV Fanfic posted:I don't understand. I thought the problem with netflix was the ISPs wanted to leverage their local duopolies to squeeze money from netflix. no netflix thought they could leverage their customer base to be able to pay slightly less money
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
Snapchat A Titty posted:someone tally up the yospossers pro & con so i can know who to consider retarded i'm pro net neutrghazi
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 03:18
|
|
|
madeupfred posted:My grandparents are paying like $20 a month for 56k and they live less than 10 miles from a town of 100,000, how will Title II affect them? it won't. but if they already pay for unlimited long distance they could get 56k for free by dialing norcharge.com's access numbers in seattle
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:will this reduce the incentive for ISPs to play tricks with DNS and shove all YouTube/Netflix through a single datacenter causing it to poo poo itself constantly because of that link being saturated? or is this a case of not confusing laziness with malice? when you do that you're switching from local isp caches (which are usually paid for) that may be overloaded at times to pulling through network links but usually being able to avoid other congestion. it'd all fall over if everyone did that though.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
SYSV Fanfic posted:You mean free dialup. You aren't going to connect at max rate over long distance pots. It's not possible. i get 51 kilobit from virginia to seattle. they're not going to miss the extra 2 kilobits beats paying real money for dialup imo
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
SYSV Fanfic posted:You probably have the absolute best case scenario then, and it still isn't 56k. Out in bumfuckistan their CO might still be doing TDM over copper wire to the nearest fiber link for voice data. nothing is 56k dude, due to fcc regs the maximum downlink is 53.3k down and of course 33.6 k up if you don't start taking away from downlink. just have them give it a try (again only if they have unlimited long distance) and see how it works for them. no sense paying $20 a month for dialup if it'll work. i mean i've only ever used the service in nj and va, and in both cases it was on phone lines that performed terribly (like the line here can't sync dsl above 384 kilobit down and struggles to stay stable with that, hence why we got cable to replace it) Nintendo Kid fucked around with this message at 22:14 on Feb 28, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
SYSV Fanfic posted:Relax. I was being pedantic in the POS. If they even get a 44 connection now, I'd bet they would see 33 at best over long distance. 10 miles outside of a town of 100,000 is nowhere. Rural telcos are generally poo poo because there is no money to be made. no, if they can get a decent connection to their current dialup isp now they should barely see any reduction going further out. even backend of nowhere places have digital links from the central office outward these days. where do they live anyway?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
SYSV Fanfic posted:Speaking of net pootrality, isn't rural phone service being poo poo an unintended consequence of the AT&T breakup? oh yeah totally. originally part of the deal allowing AT&T to maintain a stranglehold over like 95% of the country was they had to provide equally good service all over where possible. post breakup, the baby bells were free to sell off, particularly rural, areas that they ddin't think were profitable enough to whoever would take it. at this point entire states have been sold off, like how verizon sold nearly all of West Virgnia to frontier, noted poo poo-tier isp and phone provider. some areas were lucky to have their local phone service sold off to a co-op or similar that actually cared about maintaining service, others were the original at&t subsidiary being spun off wholesale and left to run itself. SYSV Fanfic posted:There are COs in my state that you can still hear the click clack of analog switching in. yes but when your dsl is cycling down to 384 kilobit you know the line is hosed. that's not just a minor issue with the line.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 22:45
|
|
|
Beeftweeter posted:fishmech did you go to high school in nj and if so did you do forensics of course i went to high school there. don't know of any high school that did forensics tho
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 23:07
|
|
|
wyoak posted:the bigger difference is their lobbyists in Australia weren't able to change the law what law is there to change in australia? australians have had weird no cap agreements for decades, because they're chronically short of off-continent bandwidth
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 10:11 |
|
|
PleasureKevin posted:http://www.wsj.com/articles/holman-jenkins-netflix-is-the-culprit-1426633943 lol
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2015 04:48
|
|