# FCC Repeals Net Neutrality Rule **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 14, 2017, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522 "2017-12-14T18:35:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/221 "2017-12-15T20:29:40Z")
This “by type vs by content” argument is a little bit inaccurate. Packets arrive with headers that identify the source, so the ISPs do not even have to do deep packet inspection to throttle specific content, they just have to look at where the packets are coming from, which is fairly shallow inspection. If they want to throttle Netflix, all they have to do is see that the packet is coming from Netflix – it is of little importance to them whether the content is streaming video data or a video listing menu table, because throttling either of those serves their endgame. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/222 "2017-12-15T20:29:48Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > Most job applications were already online in 2015. Many university courses, as well. If they worked (all the way back) then, why wouldn’t they continue to work today or tomorrow? Did you even look at the timelines and backstories of NN, or are you just going to continue to remain ignorant of the facts? ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/223 "2017-12-15T20:30:54Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Ah, but what if they let you pay more for it as well? Wouldn’t that make it better? Hmmmmmm, that does sweeten the pot a little. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/224 "2017-12-15T20:32:51Z")
It’d be nice, though quite unexpected, for the people in favour of the decision to admit that it’s largely an experiment, that they have no real idea of what the results are likely to be - no doubt there will be some positives and some negatives, but the overall result is impossible to predict. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/225 "2017-12-15T20:33:53Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > It’d be nice, though quite unexpected, fur the people in favour of the decision to admit that it’s largely an experiment, that they have no real idea of what the results are likely to be - no doubt there will be some positives and some negatives, but the overall result is impossible to predict. Perhaps you could list some of the positives? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/226 "2017-12-15T20:40:25Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Perhaps you could list some of the positives? It’s not inconceivable to me that this could drive investment and innovation in wireless internet services. That’s about it, off the top of my head. I’m still leaving “slow motion train wreck” on the table. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/227 "2017-12-15T20:42:07Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > It’s not inconceivable to me that this could drive investment and innovation in wireless internet services. > > That’s about it, off the top of my head. I’m still leaving “slow motion train wreck” on the table. Fair enough. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/228 "2017-12-15T20:45:47Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Sure, you acknowledge that specific abuses would justify correction by regulation. But what you, and others, fail to acknowledge is that specific abuses occurred ALREADY, and those abuses led to NN being implemented. Those in favor of NN aren’t doing themselves any good by the “sky is falling” arguments: How will I apply for a job, get a university degree, pay my bills, and yes, watch television/listen to the radio/play my games, now that the rule has been repealed. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/229 "2017-12-15T20:49:16Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > Those in favor of NN aren’t doing themselves any good by the “sky is falling” arguments: How will I apply for a job, get a university degree, pay my bills, and yes, watch television or listen to the radio, now that the rule has been repealed. Bricker already addressed that. > [@Bricker](#): > > “A fallacious argument similar to reductio ad absurdum often seen in polemical debate is the straw man logical fallacy. A straw man argument attempts to refute a given proposition by showing that a slightly different or inaccurate form of the proposition (the ‘straw man’) has an absurd, unpleasant, or ridiculous consequence, relying on the audience failing to notice that the argument does not actually apply to the original proposition.” > > - Wikipedia ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/230 "2017-12-15T20:58:54Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > It’d be nice, though quite unexpected, for the people in favour of the decision to admit that it’s largely an experiment, that they have no real idea of what the results are likely to be - no doubt there will be some positives and some negatives, but the overall result is impossible to predict. Alberta’s natural gas deregulation drama might provide a map to this new territory, though. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/231 "2017-12-15T21:01:15Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > Those in favor of NN aren’t doing themselves any good by the “sky is falling” arguments: How will I apply for a job, get a university degree, pay my bills, and yes, watch television/listen to the radio/play my games, now that the rule has been repealed. And those that argue against NN don’t do themselves any favors by focusing on these strawmen and ignoring the real concerns brought by those in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![sweepkick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/87869e/32.png) [@sweepkick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sweepkick)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/232 "2017-12-15T21:04:38Z")
As an aside, the Internet market in the US is a lot like health care in the US. More expensive than other countries, with less favorable service levels. Other countries have proven track records of providing fast and modern Internet access at reasonable, even cheap prices, by way of comparison. Yet here we are, refusing to learn from other countries. _scratches head_ hmmm… I wonder why that is… ---
**Author:** ![sweepkick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/87869e/32.png) [@sweepkick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sweepkick)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/233 "2017-12-15T21:05:58Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > Those in favor of NN aren’t doing themselves any good by the “sky is falling” arguments: How will I apply for a job, get a university degree, pay my bills, and yes, watch television/listen to the radio/play my games, now that the rule has been repealed. Well I suppose if the ISPs pinky swear that they won’t control user content, or be bad, that should be good enough for any reasonable consumer. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/234 "2017-12-15T21:21:46Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Sure, you acknowledge that specific abuses would justify correction by regulation. But what you, and others, fail to acknowledge is that specific abuses occurred ALREADY, and those abuses led to NN being implemented. > > When this fact is pointed out to you, it seems you conveniently ignore it. Nope. I argue that the rules applied in response to the perceived abuses were ridiculously broad in scope, far more intrusive than was required to address the issues that spawned the rulemaking. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/235 "2017-12-15T21:22:46Z")
> [@sweepkick](#): > > As an aside, the Internet market in the US is a lot like health care in the US. More expensive than other countries, with less favorable service levels. Other countries have proven track records of providing fast and modern Internet access at reasonable, even cheap prices, by way of comparison. Yet here we are, refusing to learn from other countries. > > _scratches head_ hmmm… I wonder why that is… What country specifically are you picturing? ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/236 "2017-12-15T21:31:00Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Since my OP also acknowledged that specific abuses would justify correction by regulation, examples that assume some horrid situation would occur without correcting regulation are strawman attacks. That’s absurd. The FCC is a [captured](https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/12/ajit-pai-jokes-about-being-a-brainwashed-verizon-puppet-at-the-fcc/) [regulator](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture). Those in charge of the FCC currently do not even believe that the FCC should be involved in abuses by telecommunications companies. They want to hand those responsibilities over to the FTC, who do not have the departments, manpower, or expertise to handle such a thing. It’s a deliberate attempt to sabotage any regulator’s ability to respond to the abuses of telecom companies. This is by design. This is the whole fucking point of what they’re doing. Verizon and Comcast and AT&T aren’t paying millions to buy senators so that they can make a marginal reduction in latency through QoS, they’re doing it so they can block competitors and start charging for internet services a la carte cable TV packages. The idea that the FCC is doing this for the consumer, and therefore, if it opens the system up to telecom abuse, they’ll fix that is absurd. It’s magical thinking on your part to dismiss the real world consequences of what you advocate. I don’t believe that your position on that issue is sincerely held, because I don’t think you’re so blind as to see what’s going on as benevolent or consumer-focused. So let me again ask you directly, do you think that these changes in internet regulation will more likely than not be bad for the consumer? ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/237 "2017-12-15T21:31:27Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > And those that argue against NN don’t do themselves any favors by focusing on these strawmen and ignoring the real concerns brought by those in this thread. Except that more than one poster in this thread brought up all of those things as a “concern” about the loss of NN. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/238 "2017-12-15T21:35:33Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Nope. I argue that the rules applied in response to the perceived abuses were ridiculously broad in scope, far more intrusive than was required to address the issues that spawned the rulemaking. But as of this vote by the FCC, there are no rules preventing any of those abuses, right? How likely do you think, given the current political climate, that more narrowly tailored regulations will be adopted to prevent the specific abuses we’ve already seen can occur absent net neutrality? ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/239 "2017-12-15T21:40:41Z")
> [@sweepkick](#): > > This is where the analogy breaks down due to the fundamental difference in shipping data packets/content vs. shipping perishable goods. Your response doesn’t show an understanding of the difference between bandwidth and latency and completely misses the point of the analogy. > [@manson1972](#): > > Let’s say my ISP now offers me connectivity to every site, application, service, etc., on the Internet right now for one set price at whatever speed I choose to pay for. > > What services could they offer me that would improve upon that? They could route latency critical data like games and phone calls quicker than other data. They could offer discounted high speed plans with tight restrictions on streaming bandwidth They could offer privacy services where identifying data you send is randomized so sites couldn’t track you They could offer an adblock service where they drop ad related packets They could offer scam protection services where known fraudulent sites are blocked > [@RickG](#): > > In treis’s analogy, it’s as if the trucking company could not only offer tiered service for speed of delivery, but also owned a spinach farm and delivered their spinach even faster. Who could compete with their super-extra fresh spinach? Like how Amazon has started their own delivery service to ensure the timeliness their customers demand. There’s pros and cons to these sorts of vertically integrated company. Take Android/iOS that come with a lot of their own apps. It’s good because these apps are tightly integrated with the OS and work really well. It’s bad because good luck competing with them. ---
**Author:** ![Fuji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@Fuji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/240 "2017-12-15T22:46:37Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > Most job applications were already online in 2015. Many university courses, as well. If they worked (all the way back) then, why wouldn’t they continue to work today or tomorrow? That’s either a disingenuous or haphazard reply you’ve offered here, because that wasn’t the argument which I was responding to you about. In case you’ve forgotten: > [@D\_Anconia](#): > > You’re the one who claimed that the internet “is almost a necessity”. > [@Fuji](#): > > :dubious: > > Try getting a job in 2017 without having internet access. Or increasingly, getting a college degree that would permit you to even qualify for such a job in the first place. Streaming video isn’t just for LOLz - it’s also for university lectures. So yeah, still… :dubious: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522.md?page=13)