https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-tzm5azFQ4
So found this with all the other stuff. He says he "strongly supports an open internet" oh and hopes the american people will act to support it. We do, he doesnt apparently know so. Oh and how does letting huge companies buy out their competitors create competition? It doesn't, even though he says it does.
this has very little substance:
He evaded the question about whether broadband is a public utility, so i guess that's a NO on reclassification ?
He did say customers ought to be able to reach >>all<< of the internet, >>without<< degradation & yet when he got pined on Netflix paying ransom to Comcast he said that's a peering issue and then the interview ended
My interpretation:
ISPs can create the 2 class internet by collecting fast-lane money via proxy (Netflix has to pay more which means Netflix customers have to pay more)
More expensive content + the data caps the ISPs announced = increase in file-sharing with an offline redistribution ring. -> Joe the Downloader & 50 of his friends are going to each pirate one unique movie & redistribute by thumb drive or mesh-net . Just like it was in the 90s, except then people used CD's.
I commented mostly on youtube, but this was one thing I had to say, "He refused to answer "hypothetical questions" all hypothetical questions need to be answer. That is like someone asking the president, what if nuclear war happens. What do we do? The president states it hasnt happened and isnt happening now, so i am not going to answer that. He claims he can enforce the internet, he can't enforce it. How do I know. Two court cases decided it with Verizon and Comcast. Fuck you Wheeler. The judges suggested a reclassification and the people at that time didnt do anything about it and neither are you." Which is what he did with everything related to net neutrality. The one woman asked a hypothetical question about fast lanes, and he was like I dont answer what ifs. If that were the case than nothing would ever be planned for. Natural disasters, so what its not like the climate has anything to do with them. We dont have anything to do with the climate. Oh wait thats the wrong fucking side of the aisle. Seems like both left and right politicians don't like answering what ifs, even if facts are presented in front of them. As in Wheeler who states he and the FCC will promote open internet. He legally has no ground to do so. Two court cases decided that. Both judges gave the FCC advice on how to proceed. Did they take it? Nope. Nope. Nope. I love how my dad was like the FCC has a lot of upcry within itself. Apparently not enough to make it 3 to 2 going the other way. I knew the FCC wasn't going to reclassify or change the subject of the vote. Haha, just noticed the quote and the explanation of the quote are the same post. :)
He uses words like "openess" which aren't even real words in place of things like 'net nuetrality', as he says their arent any rules, and creating rules under title II is pointless as these are not title II entities. This guy isn't incompetent, he knows what he is talking about, he worked for a long time as a lobyist, they probably wouldn't have hired him if he didn't know what he was talking about, they certainly wouldn't have kept him! He is deliberately lieing, plain and simple, to mislead the uninformed public, into thinking he is acting in their interest!
Also if he cared about competition, if he cared about companies hording mobile spectrum he would pass something akin to the 'Waste lands acts' of the British Dominions, essentially unused spectrum would return to FCC ownership, and be available to be auctioned off to someone who will use it. How about firms competing for spectrum in at least some cases based on how they are going to utilize the spectrum instead of money, it should (in theory) be that the person who can most effectively use the spectrum can pay the most, but I think the larger companies have a big advantage when it comes down to cash.
Or he is talking about 'openess' how about removing some of these archaic restrictions on amature radio enthusiasts and whatnot, and reopening the spectrum to these people, allowing some of the spectrum (perhaps the TV spectrum), to be made available for public use! Alot of regulations came about after the titanic sunk, which destroyed alot of the amature communications.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/07/did-the-titanic-disaster-let-uncle-sam-take-over-the-airwaves/
What do you think is going to happen when ATaT walks into the auction room, they can always pay $1 more than anyone else. Its immaterial to profit, as long as they stop that one guy with the Flux inverter-feedback loop from stuffing antanae down peoples chimineys and selling his awseome service, it is worth it! It should be very clear if the price is not commercially feasabile, or if they are bidding more than they can afford, sure they can drive the price up a bit. Besides I am sure these companies will take the best bits of spectrum even with a quota, then gobble up the guys who own the rest.
Quotes from the video, Too-long-dont-watch
19:20
I buy a pipe
I buy a pathway
Nobody can mess with that
They cant degrade it
they cant tell me I cant get something
They cant tell somebody they can only get on toms pathway if you pay me a price
They cant block
13:55
If a consumer buys service from their ISP, they oughta have the right to use all of that bandwidth to use all of the internet, not this part of that part, not prioritize, they have the right to use it all
14:30
Openess and net neutrality interchangable, no fast lane authorized.
25:00
Nothing in this (706) authorizes a fast lane.
So he says ISPs cant discriminate between packets, shape your internet, slow you down, that when you buy a service you are paying for a pipe, and you can use that to access any part of the internet at the full speed. This is not true, indeed their are no regulations applying to this, because ISPS are not section two, and many americans are on caps, and are being shapped/throttled, etc..etc...
This guy is a liar! Remember level 3, they even told everybody, that some ISPs were messing with traffic going to netflix! Netflix services degraded on some isps, it wasnt all ISPs, it wasnt on netflixes side! It wasnt all traffic from those ISPS, it was just netflix, then after slowing netflix down, they extorted money from them!
Also people don't buy pipes/pathways , they rent access, so i guess the "not messing with that"-rule doesn't really apply for customers. So yet more double-talk.