Explain it like I'm 5: What benefits will I be seeing when net neutrality ends next month?

Just to go off topic for a minute since I really don’t think this has nothing to do with net neutrality:

Amazon Prime and Amazon Fulfillment are kind of two different animals. Prime is used to refer to products sold directly by Amazon. Fulfillment involves third-party sellers. Some third-party sellers use Fulfillment, send their goods to Amazon, and Amazon ships their stuff using Prime guidelines. They’re listed on the site as Prime, but in actuality these are third-party sellers. Other third-party sellers who don’t use Fulfillment ship their stuff on their own without using Prime.

Maybe that explanation was unnecessary and I don’t know where Ish was coming from with that statement, but I just wanted to clarify. It also has, as I said, zero to do with net neutrality.

I taught my five year old that laws are about right and wrong, not about benefiting you personally.

1 Like

yeah, that made me LOL too. heck, even i’m up to my eyeballs in tech.

Bill to repeal changes to net neutrality passed the senate. Will likely fail in the house. Regardless, likely to be a big upcoming campaign issue. Be ready for fire and brimstone from both sides of the argument.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the fall. And to the bold, I’d be shocked if this were not the case.

Doubt if you will see much change. NN was barely in effect. It was an unnecessary regulation. The internet did quite well without government enforced neutrality. The key is to see who wanted “net neutrality.” It was Google, Facebook, etc. They knew they could use it to enforce their monopolies.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:

Here’s the entire Article I, Section 8. What do you consider Clause 3, To regulate commerce…, or To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcy:

Section 8.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;–And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

I consider clause 3 to be clause 3. I’m not sure where the confusion is coming from. Also known as the “commerce clause.”

What benefit did you get when it started?

Why don’t you complain to the Local City and State governments Like New York City who didn’t allow competition for ISP providers because they made deals with the ISP.

So Democrats keeping competition out the solution is to have Federal Government to force Neutrality.

So sick of people not blaming the actual States that Made the Deals to block other ISPS to come in.

1 Like

Did you not even bother to read what I have posted on the matter? When it comes to physical link layer infrastructure it is more than impractical to allow more than one provider into a geographical area. Just how many cable poles or how many underground conduits have to be buried, torn up, and reburied to present some competition?

These local and state governments don’t do this because they are board. They do it because no one wants to look up in the sky and see 10 cable lines, plus 6 power lines, plus 5 telephone lines running up and down every street in their city.

Nor do they want their street torn up for weeks at a time several times a year when 1 of those 10 cable lines underground has to be repaired or replaced. It’s the sole reason monopoly agreements even exist.

Perhaps a visual would help…

speaking of LOL… I bet you are a wiz at information theory.

you’d probably be shocked to find out the type of company i founded (in the '80s). it’s not just high tech.

oh, no doubt

:roll_eyes:

You posting Images from India?
We live in the USA and Net Neutrality affects the USA. So please stop posting crap that is not relevant to USA Net Neutrality.

Its absolutely relevant, and you don’t get tell me what to post.

You’ll see the same benefits people saw when the phone companies were de-regulated. The Net Not Neutral Laws Obama pushed treated ISP’s like the FCC treated phone companies prior to deregulation. That non neutrality law gave the government control over how ISP’s price and offer services.

The result of de-regulation of phone companies was lower prices across the board.

Companies offer services and set prices, then consumers decide whether to purchase those products,. If the products aren’t good or prices too high, consumers don’t buy the products. That’s a free market.

The problem is isps have already tried this and we would like to stop them from throttling service and creating monopolies. I literally cant see any downsides of the way the net has been since its broad availability to the public.

1 Like

Please compare and contrast the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the proposed removal of Net Neutrality. Then tell me how the two are even remotely similar.

That is not the issue here. The issue is isps getting the opportunity to throttle hannity.com vs democratic underground. Get it now?

1 Like