Net Neutrality

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Net Neutrality

rjlocal22
Does Net Neutrality mean anyone can say or do what they want without government interference? Hmmm!
What about the criminals who prey on net users to scam them out of their money?
Are we suppose to allow them the freedom to commit their crimes?
There must be some type of policing or software to protect people from scammers.
The use of protective software would be voluntary.
Your opinion please.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Net Neutrality

Wolf K.
On 2018-12-14 16:01, [hidden email] wrote:
> Does Net Neutrality mean anyone can say or do what they want without government interference? Hmmm!
> What about the criminals who prey on net users to scam them out of their money?
> Are we suppose to allow them the freedom to commit their crimes?
> There must be some type of policing or software to protect people from scammers.
> The use of protective software would be voluntary.
> Your opinion please.

Irrelevant to the concept of "net neutrality". May be relevant to
notions of civil society, protection of the public, etc.

"Net Neutrality" means that the ISPs must treat all customers equally.
In particular, they cannot sell high speed service to either content
suppliers nor to consumers.

In February, the FCC abolished net neutrality in the USA. here's one of
several reports on that decision:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/02/22/the-fccs-net-neutrality-rules-will-die-on-april-23-heres-what-happens-now/?utm_term=.8e99b07cfc7d

The net effect is that the ISPs can offer tiered pricing to their
customers. Have they done so? I don't know.

--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
It's called an "opinion" because it's not a fact.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Net Neutrality

Jeff Barnett
Wolf K wrote on 12/14/2018 3:47 PM:

> On 2018-12-14 16:01, [hidden email] wrote:
>> Does Net Neutrality mean anyone can say or do what they want without
>> government interference? Hmmm!
>> What about the criminals who prey on net users to scam them out of
>> their money?
>> Are we suppose to allow them the freedom to commit their crimes?
>> There must be some type of policing or software to protect people from
>> scammers.
>> The use of protective software would be voluntary.
>> Your opinion please.
>
> Irrelevant to the concept of "net neutrality". May be relevant to
> notions of civil society, protection of the public, etc.
>
> "Net Neutrality" means that the ISPs must treat all customers equally.
> In particular, they cannot sell high speed service to either content
> suppliers nor to consumers.
>
> In February, the FCC abolished net neutrality in the USA. here's one of
> several reports on that decision:
>
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/02/22/the-fccs-net-neutrality-rules-will-die-on-april-23-heres-what-happens-now/?utm_term=.8e99b07cfc7d 
>
>
> The net effect is that the ISPs can offer tiered pricing to their
> customers. Have they done so? I don't know.

Comcast sells access by speed. There are a few tires for "homes" and
other business arrangements (I think these include fixed IP). This all
was available BEFORE the FCC pissed in the soup so I'm having trouble
understanding what, in addition, must be mixed into the concept of
"neutrality".
--
Jeff Barnett

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Net Neutrality

Hartdonor
In reply to this post by rjlocal22
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:01:56 -0800 (PST), in mozilla.general,
[hidden email] wrote:

>Does Net Neutrality mean anyone can say or do what they want without government interference? Hmmm!
>What about the criminals who prey on net users to scam them out of their money?
>Are we suppose to allow them the freedom to commit their crimes?
>There must be some type of policing or software to protect people from scammers.
>The use of protective software would be voluntary.
>Your opinion please.

IMHO, you don't understand what Net Neutrality is. Google it. Read about
it for a week, then come back. Your question makes no sense.

--
Give all you can, don't give more than you can.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Net Neutrality

EnDeeGee
In reply to this post by rjlocal22
On 14-Dec.-2018 16:01, [hidden email] wrote:
> Does Net Neutrality mean anyone can say or do what they want without government interference? Hmmm!
> What about the criminals who prey on net users to scam them out of their money?
> Are we suppose to allow them the freedom to commit their crimes?
> There must be some type of policing or software to protect people from scammers.
> The use of protective software would be voluntary.
> Your opinion please.
>

Some reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality

http://preview.tinyurl.com/jw6s533
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Net Neutrality

Wolf K.
In reply to this post by Jeff Barnett
On 2018-12-14 17:59, Jeff Barnett wrote:

> Wolf K wrote on 12/14/2018 3:47 PM:
>> On 2018-12-14 16:01, [hidden email] wrote:
>>> Does Net Neutrality mean anyone can say or do what they want without
>>> government interference? Hmmm!
>>> What about the criminals who prey on net users to scam them out of
>>> their money?
>>> Are we suppose to allow them the freedom to commit their crimes?
>>> There must be some type of policing or software to protect people
>>> from scammers.
>>> The use of protective software would be voluntary.
>>> Your opinion please.
>>
>> Irrelevant to the concept of "net neutrality". May be relevant to
>> notions of civil society, protection of the public, etc.
>>
>> "Net Neutrality" means that the ISPs must treat all customers equally.
>> In particular, they cannot sell high speed service to either content
>> suppliers nor to consumers.
>>
>> In February, the FCC abolished net neutrality in the USA. here's one
>> of several reports on that decision:
>>
>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/02/22/the-fccs-net-neutrality-rules-will-die-on-april-23-heres-what-happens-now/?utm_term=.8e99b07cfc7d 
>>
>>
>> The net effect is that the ISPs can offer tiered pricing to their
>> customers. Have they done so? I don't know.
>
> Comcast sells access by speed. There are a few tires for "homes" and
> other business arrangements (I think these include fixed IP). This all
> was available BEFORE the FCC pissed in the soup so I'm having trouble
> understanding what, in addition, must be mixed into the concept of
> "neutrality".

If Comcast was doing that before the FCC abolished net neutrality, then
Comcast was acting illegally.

--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
It's called an "opinion" because it's not a fact.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Net Neutrality

WaltS48-9
In reply to this post by rjlocal22
On 12/14/18 4:01 PM, [hidden email] wrote:
> Does Net Neutrality mean anyone can say or do what they want without government interference? Hmmm!
> What about the criminals who prey on net users to scam them out of their money?
> Are we suppose to allow them the freedom to commit their crimes?
> There must be some type of policing or software to protect people from scammers.
> The use of protective software would be voluntary.
> Your opinion please.
>

Here is some more reading you can do in your spare time to get a better
grasp of the subject.

<https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/category/net-neutrality/>

I'd start with the last post on page two and work my way back to the
most recent.

--
OS: Ubuntu Linux 18.04LTS - Gnome Desktop
https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/get-involved/

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Net Neutrality

Rinaldi-2
In reply to this post by Wolf K.
On 12/14/18 6:28 PM, Wolf K wrote:
>>
>> Comcast sells access by speed. There are a few tires for "homes" and
>> other business arrangements (I think these include fixed IP). This all
>> was available BEFORE the FCC pissed in the soup so I'm having trouble
>> understanding what, in addition, must be mixed into the concept of
>> "neutrality".
>
> If Comcast was doing that before the FCC abolished net neutrality, then
> Comcast was acting illegally.

I assume he meant tiers.  This has been going on for most of modern
memory, i.e., the advent of dsl.  I have had the option of buying 1.5,
3, 6, or 12 MB/s.  from Bellsouth, AT&T, or currently Windstream.

Rinaldi.
--
... and furthermore ... I don't like your trousers.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general