ABXZone Computer  Forums



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-16-2015, 05:38 PM   #1
traveler
Where to next?
 
traveler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: South Florida
Posts: 19,787
Secret FCC meeting called by US Govt to tax all internet traffic

Secret meeting of FCC on February 26, 2015

What is this secret meeting I am hearing about where the FCC is going to vote per the demand of Obama to create regulations which will put new taxes on your internet bill? Obama wants these new taxes on your cable, broadband, and wireless connections. Obama will not allow the regulations to be viewed by the public until after they are passed. Internet censorship is rumored to be included in the new regulations.

***If you like your current internet plan, you can not keep your current internet plan***


(Offline)   Reply With Quote

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]
Old 02-16-2015, 07:05 PM   #2
traveler
Where to next?
 
traveler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: South Florida
Posts: 19,787
Re: Secret FCC meeting called by US Govt to tax all internet traffic

All I found so far is this:


http://www.latimes.com/opinion/edito...216-story.html




(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2015, 04:48 PM   #3
traveler
Where to next?
 
traveler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: South Florida
Posts: 19,787
Re: Secret FCC meeting called by US Govt to tax all internet traffic

So no one cares that your internet bill is going to increase just because a few people somewhere just WANT TO take more money from you and give you nothing in return. Sad.


(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2015, 07:29 PM   #4
mindx2
Registered User
 
mindx2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 572
Re: Secret FCC meeting called by US Govt to tax all internet traffic

Quote:
Originally Posted by traveler View Post
So no one cares that your internet bill is going to increase just because a few people somewhere just WANT TO take more money from you and give you nothing in return. Sad.


You just described much of what government does in today's world... sad, but true...
__________________
ASUS P8Z68-V Pro GEN 3 / Intel Core i5-2500K Sandy Bridge 3.3GHz / CORSAIR Hydro Series H100 / G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) / 2 x EVGA 2GB GTX 560 PCI-e / Crucial M4 2.5" 256GB SATA III / WD VelociRaptor 500GB / 2 Western Digital Green 500GB SATA / Creative X-Fi Fatal1ty PCI-e / SAMSUNG Black Blu-ray Combo SATA / NZXT Phantom 820 Matte Black Steel ATX Full Tower / CORSAIR HX Series HX750 750W / ViewSonic VA243wm LCD / Windows 7 Home Premium- 64
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2015, 01:16 PM   #5
Sandog
Moderator
 
Sandog's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,117
Re: Secret FCC meeting called by US Govt to tax all internet traffic

Passed.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015...used-meddling/
__________________
Windows 10 Pro / Corsair 760T Arctic White / ASUS ROG RAMPAGE VI APEX / Intel i7-7820X / ASUS ROG-STRIX-GTX1080-O8G-11GBPS / Corsair Dominator Platinum ROG Edition 32GB DDR4 DRAM 3200MHz C16 / SeaSonic Prime 750W Titanium / ASUS ROG SWIFT PG348Q / Intel Optane SSD 900P 480GB / Samsung 850 Pro 1TB / Ducky YoTS / ASUS ROG GLADIUS II / ASUS Essence STX / Audioengine HDP6, N22, S8 / AKG K712 PRO


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(Online)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2015, 08:50 PM   #6
SKI
Comms Moderator
 
SKI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 8,635
Re: Secret FCC meeting called by US Govt to tax all internet traffic

I haven't yet read anything that tells me what this regulation actually does... sad, to say the least, from what the US President claims to be "the most transparent administration ever". Some US bureaucrats are obviously most comfortable working in secrecy. It strikes me as absurd that the FCC asked for public comments, and yet remains totally unwilling to share the specifics of the regulation they are proposing with the American people... until after they've voted to implement their new regulation. Well, this is why everything in the US winds up in the courts.

__________________
Never try to teach a pig to sing...
It wastes your time, and annoys the pig.

(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2015, 05:00 AM   #7
Sandog
Moderator
 
Sandog's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,117
Re: Secret FCC meeting called by US Govt to tax all internet traffic

I haven't read deeply into it but the keyword in net neutrality. From my understanding it makes a single canned service to all individuals from ISP's. The idea I was getting is they are making it more government managed like a utility which also does not discriminate service. I probably have the wrong idea from limited information I have read so far but it reminds me of ObamaCare where you may be forced to use a less capable doctor.
__________________
Windows 10 Pro / Corsair 760T Arctic White / ASUS ROG RAMPAGE VI APEX / Intel i7-7820X / ASUS ROG-STRIX-GTX1080-O8G-11GBPS / Corsair Dominator Platinum ROG Edition 32GB DDR4 DRAM 3200MHz C16 / SeaSonic Prime 750W Titanium / ASUS ROG SWIFT PG348Q / Intel Optane SSD 900P 480GB / Samsung 850 Pro 1TB / Ducky YoTS / ASUS ROG GLADIUS II / ASUS Essence STX / Audioengine HDP6, N22, S8 / AKG K712 PRO


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(Online)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2015, 10:06 AM   #8
ctal
Eschews Obfuscation
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 2,443
Re: Secret FCC meeting called by US Govt to tax all internet traffic

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandog View Post
I haven't read deeply into it but the keyword in net neutrality. From my understanding it makes a single canned service to all individuals from ISP's. The idea I was getting is they are making it more government managed like a utility which also does not discriminate service. I probably have the wrong idea from limited information I have read so far but it reminds me of ObamaCare where you may be forced to use a less capable doctor.
No, that's not true at all. Net neutrality, as a concept, has nothing to do with the user's connection to the internet, or with the services the user receives from the ISP. It has to do with preventing the ISP's from providing preferential treatment (in terms of faster download speeds) to websites willing to pay the ISP's for those faster speeds, relative to the download speeds the ISP provides for other websites. Providing a website with faster download speeds would presumably result in a competitive advantage for that site in attracting viewers, to the detriment of other sites.

If net neutrality is not protected, access to vast numbers of websites, especially smaller ones not willing or able to pay for preferential treatment, could conceivably end up being slowed to the point where many or most users would simply not go to them. Potentially putting those sites out of business, and creating a disincentive for potential startups.

Of course, what all the fine print may be in the new regulations, and whether it will be effective in protecting net neutrality, and whether it will have unintended adverse consequences, remain to be seen.

Regards,
-- Al
__________________
"I didn't say I didn't say it. I said that I didn't say that I said it. I want to make that very clear."
-- George Romney, in 1968, while campaigning for the Republican nomination for President of the United States.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2015, 10:59 AM   #9
ctal
Eschews Obfuscation
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 2,443
Re: Secret FCC meeting called by US Govt to tax all internet traffic

Also, this article, among many, appears to present a balanced summary. An excerpt:

Quote:
The new rules, which will apply to both wired and wireless Internet connections, include several major restrictions on Internet service providers. They may not slow down or block access to legal content, applications or services. They also may not create "fast lanes," speeding up some traffic in return for additional fees.

"We are here to ensure that there is only one Internet, where applications, new products, ideas and points of view have an equal chance of being seen and heard," Commissioner Mignon Clyburn said. "We are here because we want to enable those with deep pockets as well as those with empty pockets the same opportunities to succeed."

The FCC would not regulate the price of Internet services under the new rules and would not impose any new taxes or government-mandated fees. Nonetheless, opponents said they feared price regulations and new taxes would come eventually, further discouraging investment.

Two Republican commissioners, along with cable and telephone companies, blasted the new rules, warning that they might curb their investment in expanding Internet service and lead to higher prices for consumers. Internet service shouldn’t be regulated under 1930s era telephone rules, they argued.

"The Internet has become a powerful force for freedom, here and around the world," Ajit Pai, one of the two dissenters, said. "So it is sad to witness this morning the FCC’s unprecedented attempts to replace that freedom with government control. It shouldn't be this way."
To be sure it's clear, the "additional fees," "deep pockets," and "empty pockets" that are mentioned refer to websites, not users.

Regards,
-- Al
__________________
"I didn't say I didn't say it. I said that I didn't say that I said it. I want to make that very clear."
-- George Romney, in 1968, while campaigning for the Republican nomination for President of the United States.

Last edited by ctal; 02-27-2015 at 11:07 AM..
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2015, 09:44 PM   #10
PeterT
CUSL2 > Sabertooth Z87
 
PeterT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sunny Florida, USA
Posts: 5,232
Re: Secret FCC meeting called by US Govt to tax all internet traffic

Quote:
Originally Posted by ctal View Post
No, that's not true at all. Net neutrality, as a concept, has nothing to do with the user's connection to the internet, or with the services the user receives from the ISP. It has to do with preventing the ISP's from providing preferential treatment (in terms of faster download speeds) to websites willing to pay the ISP's for those faster speeds, relative to the download speeds the ISP provides for other websites. Providing a website with faster download speeds would presumably result in a competitive advantage for that site in attracting viewers, to the detriment of other sites.

If net neutrality is not protected, access to vast numbers of websites, especially smaller ones not willing or able to pay for preferential treatment, could conceivably end up being slowed to the point where many or most users would simply not go to them. Potentially putting those sites out of business, and creating a disincentive for potential startups.

Of course, what all the fine print may be in the new regulations, and whether it will be effective in protecting net neutrality, and whether it will have unintended adverse consequences, remain to be seen.

Regards,
-- Al
Al, thank you for bringing some refreshing clarity to this thread.
__________________
Current systems in the house, in chronological order. Mine in bold:
Desktop:
Corsair 550D & AX750, Asus Sabertooth
Z87, i7-4770K, 4x4GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600, Asus Strix GTX 970 4GB, Samsung 850 EVO 500GB SSD
Antec SOLO II, Corsair TX650M, Asus ROG Crossblade Ranger, AMD A10-7890K, 4x4GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600, Asus R9 270X DirectCU II TOP 2GB,

Samsung 840 EVO 250GB SSD
Antec SOLO, Corsair TX650, Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P, Intel Q9550, 4x2GB Corsair XMS2 DDR2 800,
EVGA GTX560Ti SC 1GB, Asus U3S6, Corsair Force GT 120GB SSD
Mobile:
Acer Aspire V5-552G-x852, AMD A10-5757M, Radeon 8750M 2GB, 2x4GB DDR3,
Samsung 840 EVO 500GB SSD
Acer Aspire V3-551G-X419, AMD A10-4600M, Radeon 7670M 2GB, 2x4GB Corsair DDR3 1333, Corsair Force GT 120GB SSD

Asus Eee PC 1215B-PU17, AMD E-350, 2x4GB Corsair DDR3 1333, OCZ Vertex 2 120GB SSD

(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2015, 11:56 AM   #11
Sir Skully
ABX Knight
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: USA-GA
Posts: 41,058
Re: Secret FCC meeting called by US Govt to tax all internet traffic

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterT View Post
Al, thank you for bringing some refreshing clarity to this thread.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2015, 06:50 PM   #12
ctal
Eschews Obfuscation
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 2,443
Re: Secret FCC meeting called by US Govt to tax all internet traffic

Thanks very much, Peter & Skully.

Another good if somewhat debatable article: http://www.cnet.com/news/7-things-ne...ality-wont-do/

Its concluding paragraph:

Quote:
7. What will change as a result of these new rules?

Nothing. That's the whole point. The Internet has always operated on this basic principle of openness, or Net neutrality. The decadelong debate over how to implement Net neutrality has really been a battle to make certain a level of openness is preserved. And the way to preserve it is by establishing rules of the road that let ISPs, consumers and innovators know what's allowed and what's not allowed on the Net.
Best,
-- Al
__________________
"I didn't say I didn't say it. I said that I didn't say that I said it. I want to make that very clear."
-- George Romney, in 1968, while campaigning for the Republican nomination for President of the United States.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2015, 07:06 PM   #13
Sandog
Moderator
 
Sandog's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,117
Re: Secret FCC meeting called by US Govt to tax all internet traffic

Quote:
Originally Posted by ctal View Post
No, that's not true at all. Net neutrality, as a concept, has nothing to do with the user's connection to the internet, or with the services the user receives from the ISP. It has to do with preventing the ISP's from providing preferential treatment (in terms of faster download speeds) to websites willing to pay the ISP's for those faster speeds, relative to the download speeds the ISP provides for other websites. Providing a website with faster download speeds would presumably result in a competitive advantage for that site in attracting viewers, to the detriment of other sites.

If net neutrality is not protected, access to vast numbers of websites, especially smaller ones not willing or able to pay for preferential treatment, could conceivably end up being slowed to the point where many or most users would simply not go to them. Potentially putting those sites out of business, and creating a disincentive for potential startups.

Of course, what all the fine print may be in the new regulations, and whether it will be effective in protecting net neutrality, and whether it will have unintended adverse consequences, remain to be seen.

Regards,
-- Al
Thanks for explaining it properly, sounds like something I agree with.
__________________
Windows 10 Pro / Corsair 760T Arctic White / ASUS ROG RAMPAGE VI APEX / Intel i7-7820X / ASUS ROG-STRIX-GTX1080-O8G-11GBPS / Corsair Dominator Platinum ROG Edition 32GB DDR4 DRAM 3200MHz C16 / SeaSonic Prime 750W Titanium / ASUS ROG SWIFT PG348Q / Intel Optane SSD 900P 480GB / Samsung 850 Pro 1TB / Ducky YoTS / ASUS ROG GLADIUS II / ASUS Essence STX / Audioengine HDP6, N22, S8 / AKG K712 PRO


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(Online)   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2015, 02:28 AM   #14
traveler
Where to next?
 
traveler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: South Florida
Posts: 19,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by SKI View Post
I haven't yet read anything that tells me what this regulation actually does... sad, to say the least, from what the US President claims to be "the most transparent administration ever". Some US bureaucrats are obviously most comfortable working in secrecy. It strikes me as absurd that the FCC asked for public comments, and yet remains totally unwilling to share the specifics of the regulation they are proposing with the American people... until after they've voted to implement their new regulation. Well, this is why everything in the US winds up in the courts.


Class action suit???


(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2015, 02:43 AM   #15
traveler
Where to next?
 
traveler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: South Florida
Posts: 19,787
Despite all the articles referred to above ... and ... despite everyone's comments and opinions:

* Why was there no copy available for the public to read BEFORE the vote?

* Why did Baby Doc Barak command that the FCC meet in secret to discuss and vote on the reg?

* Why was the FCC vote on party lines (political payoffs? cronyism?)?

* Why was this reg rammed through at this time?

Is the reg finally available to read?


(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com

© 2006 - 2016 ABXZone Forums | About ABX Zone Forums | Advertisers | Investors | Legal | A member of the Crowdgather Forum Community