Going to be interesting times, in a bad way. Everyone knows now in the US the newly appointed FCC chairman is going to be Brendan Carr, who is against the idea of Net Neutrality so we expect that to go away again similarly to how Ajit Pai got rid of it when he was around.
Should anyone be worried about what this guy can do? Will he carry on the fight for entertainment industry’s interests?
Okay, can we focus on the subject matter instead of just devolving it into a stupid meme and treating this platform like it’s reddit? Come on, grow up and I’ve blocked half of you already.
Did this ever actually do anything. The only change I noticed was that shortly after it was repealed we could actually watch YouTube videos at my mother-in-law’s hosue (I’m assuming they were paying HughesNet to be able to make their content go faster than the artificially throttled maximum).
With the caveat I’m technical not legal… Its largely kept data caps off domestic lines, but not entirely. Net neutrality has had a couple taking points and its a long fight at the FCC that’s gotten weirder by the decade.
Net neutral meant Microsoft couldn’t make the MSN dial up network prefer windows network traffic, over the years companies got smart and just opted to pay for peering instead of running the low profit access tunnel.
Google even drops boxes to cache stuff at tiny ISPs/WISPs, but doesn’t deprioritize traffic to other end points.
There have been intermittent swings at labeling this the pay to play it is, but since the investment isn’t spilling out of public works there’s a decent case this is the fastest you could give out access to everyone.
Source: am former network closet guy who racked google cache devices, installed WISP equipment, legal layman.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Did this ever actually do anything. The only change I noticed was that shortly after it was repealed we could actually watch YouTube videos at my mother-in-law’s hosue (I’m assuming they were paying HughesNet to be able to make their content go faster than the artificially throttled maximum).
With the caveat I’m technical not legal… Its largely kept data caps off domestic lines, but not entirely. Net neutrality has had a couple taking points and its a long fight at the FCC that’s gotten weirder by the decade.
Net neutral meant Microsoft couldn’t make the MSN dial up network prefer windows network traffic, over the years companies got smart and just opted to pay for peering instead of running the low profit access tunnel.
Google even drops boxes to cache stuff at tiny ISPs/WISPs, but doesn’t deprioritize traffic to other end points.
There have been intermittent swings at labeling this the pay to play it is, but since the investment isn’t spilling out of public works there’s a decent case this is the fastest you could give out access to everyone.
Source: am former network closet guy who racked google cache devices, installed WISP equipment, legal layman.
It never affected domestic data caps. That’s a separate policy issue.
Companies are going to be slow to adopt to these kind of changes when there’s a possibility that they’ll get changed back again in a few years