EU takes a dump on others. Net neutrality is law: no roaming charges

[Meresgi]

http://www.wired.com/2014/06/net_neutrality_missing/

The only trouble is that, here in the year 2014, complaints about a fast-lane don’t make much sense. Today, privileged companies—including Google, Facebook, and Netflix—already benefit from what are essentially internet fast lanes, and this has been the case for years. Such web giants—and others—now have direct connections to big ISPs like Comcast and Verizon, and they run dedicated computer servers deep inside these ISPs. In technical lingo, these are known as “peering connections” and “content delivery servers,” and they’re a vital part of the way the internet works.

[Meresgi]

http://www.comcast.com/505

505mbps for only $400 a month!! You can get 1/2 the speed, and shitty comcast service for only ~30x the price of Google Fiber?

[kuronosan]

http://www.comcast.com/505

505mbps for only $400 a month!! You can get 1/2 the speed, and shitty comcast service for only ~30x the price of Google Fiber?

INNOVATION

[djzombie]

INNOVATION

Innovative ways to increase profit margins while they can still maintain a monopoly. If google fiber was everywhere comcast would be hemorrhaging customers.

[kuronosan]

Innovative ways to increase profit margins while they can still maintain a monopoly. If google fiber was everywhere comcast would be hemorrhaging customers.

I'll be happy when they replace my uverse later this year. Everyone I know is jumping ship.

[Qalbert]

dumb question, have Cox internet, and they send emails every month about going over 250gb of data, but there's nothing in the contract/paperwork/brochures/advertising about a data cap, so is it just bs to try to make me upgrade to a more expensive plan? surely they can't enforce something that wasn't in the agreement

[Meresgi]

dumb question, have Cox internet, and they send emails every month about going over 250gb of data, but there's nothing in the contract/paperwork/brochures/advertising about a data cap, so is it just bs to try to make me upgrade to a more expensive plan? surely they can't enforce something that wasn't in the agreement

Are they charging you anything for going over? Or knocking down your speeds as a penalty? I'd start monitoring your network speeds + examining every item on your bill to see if they are charging you ANYTHING extra and question them about it.

Innovative ways to increase profit margins while they can still maintain a monopoly. If google fiber was everywhere comcast would be hemorrhaging customers.

From what I have read too, this 505 is just a "beta" and akin to something they did years ago and then put out for everyone for free afterwards. So it's basically like paying Blizzard $300/month to get to play Warlords of Draenor beta.

[kuronosan]

Paying to pay a beta? Lol

[Qalbert]

Are they charging you anything for going over? Or knocking down your speeds as a penalty? I'd start monitoring your network speeds + examining every item on your bill to see if they are charging you ANYTHING extra and question them about it.

nah nothing that I've noticed aside from occasional slowdowns in peak hours

[octopus]

but there's nothing in the contract/paperwork/brochures/advertising about a data cap

Just from googling I found these:

http://www.cox.com/aboutus/policies/speedsusage.cox
http://www.cox.com/aboutus/policies.cox

12. Data Usage, Data Storage and Other Limitations. Cox offers multiple packages of Service with varying speeds, features and data plans (not all packages are available in all areas). You must comply with the current data usage, data storage, email limits and other requirements associated with the package of Service you selected. Information on speeds, usage and other features can be found at Speeds and Data Plans Information. You must ensure that your activities do not improperly restrict, inhibit, or degrade any other user's use of the Service, nor represent (in Cox’s sole judgment) an unusually great burden on the network itself. In addition, you must ensure that your use does not improperly restrict, inhibit, disrupt, degrade or impede Cox's ability to deliver the Service and monitor the Service, backbone, network nodes, and/or other network services. If your data usage exceeds the amount included in your Internet package, Cox may suspend the Service or require you to upgrade the Service to a higher package and/or pay additional fees. In rare cases, Cox may terminate your Service if you have not reduced your data usage after consultation with Cox.

[djzombie]

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/net...ew-cispa-rules

Netflix Could Be Classified As a 'Cybersecurity Threat' Under New CISPA Rules

The cybersecurity bill making its way through the Senate right now is so broad that it could allow ISPs to classify Netflix as a "cyber threat," which would allow them to throttle the streaming service's delivery to customers.

It would be a backdoor way for ISPs to undermine net neutrality, and it's one of the reasons why the Cybersecurity Information Protection Act of 2014—modeled on the CISPA bill that the internet has rallied against twice already—is so terrible for consumers (the other is the unfettered ferry of information between companies and the federal government, but that's another story).
RELATED: The Senate's Cybersecurity Bill Threatens Net Neutrality

Given how ISPs have fought to destroy the open internet, they'd likely jump at the chance to sidestep existing net neutrality rules without the Federal Communications Commission needing to do much of anything at all. The bill, as it's written, allows companies to employ "countermeasures" against "cybersecurity threats," but both terms are extremely broadly defined, and video streaming could easily fall within the purview of the latter.

"A 'threat,' according to the bill, is anything that makes information unavailable or less available. So, high-bandwidth uses of some types of information make other types of information that go along the same pipe less available," Greg Nojeim, a lawyer with the Center for Democracy and Technology, told me. "A company could, as a cybersecurity countermeasure, slow down Netflix in order to make other data going across its pipes more available to users."

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/hun...eeps-it-unused

Hundreds of Cities Are Wired With Fiber—But Telecom Lobbying Keeps It Unused

In light of the ongoing net neutrality battle, many people have begun looking to Google and its promise of high-speed fiber as a potential saving grace from companies that want to create an "internet fast lane." Well, the fact is, even without Google, many communities and cities throughout the country are already wired with fiber—they just don't let their residents use it.

The reasons vary by city, but in many cases, the reason you can't get gigabit internet speeds—without the threat of that service being provided by a company that wants to discriminate against certain types of traffic—is because of the giant telecom businesses that want to kill net neutrality in the first place.

Throughout the country, companies like Comcast, Time Warner Cable, CenturyLink, and Verizon have signed agreements with cities that prohibit local governments from becoming internet service providers and prohibit municipalities from selling or leasing their fiber to local startups who would compete with these huge corporations.

Because ISPs often double as cable and telephone companies, during contract negotiations with governments, they'll often offer incentives to the government—such as better or faster service, earlier access to (their company's) cable internet for residents, and the like—in exchange for a non-compete clause.

[Qalbert]

Just from googling I found these:

http://www.cox.com/aboutus/policies/speedsusage.cox
http://www.cox.com/aboutus/policies.cox

right, it's listed online but, afaik, nowhere in any actual agreement or paperwork, which seems pretty fucking shady. I was at a store getting a new modem from them and asked about it and they had to go on their own website to find what I was talking about because it wasn't documented anywhere else.

[ringthree]

Just from googling I found these:

http://www.cox.com/aboutus/policies/speedsusage.cox
http://www.cox.com/aboutus/policies.cox

I get an e-mail about this every once in a while, but they aren't enforcing anything... yet.

[Meresgi]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/google...104829648.html

Google Is Being Forced To Censor The History Of Merrill Lynch — And That Should Terrify You

[Qalbert]

io9 has put out a compilation of 'the best' posts to the FCC site.
http://io9.com/the-weirdest-angriest...-on-1628389996

[Meresgi]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...rnet-tech-boom

It’s a story that is being watched very closely by Big Cable’s critics. “In DC there is often an attitude that the only way to solve our problems is to hand them over to big business. Chattanooga is a reminder that the best solutions are often local and work out better than handing over control to Comcast or AT&T to do whatever they want with us,” said Chris Mitchell, director of community broadband networks at advocacy group the Institute for Local Self-Reliance.

[Meresgi]

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...fight-with-us/

Apparently federal government should be able to access data everywhere!

[Kaslo]

@SenTedCruz:
"Net Neutrality" is Obamacare for the Internet; the Internet should not operate at the speed of government.

Oh no you didn't.

[kuronosan]

I had to get a lick in on that.

What a fucking retard.

[Ezek]

His idiotic tweet was in response to this: