I know your comment is 2 years old but I just want to say that companies use "social media experts" who in turn may use bots that seek out videos / twitter posts / etc.... to upvote and downvote bits of information.
Josiah Everson according to polls 98.5% of the country wants net neutrality saved. Which is why I'm wondering why pai is even going through this especially when you consider the parties lack of willingness for gun control. Those 2 things combined are not favorable to him.
What’s also messed up is if you wanna become a small business but don’t wanna pay the internet company, they could shut you down by making it virtually impossible for anyone to see stuff or things you do.
***** In 02 ISPs classification was changed from common carriers to information services. In that time the major ISPs have effectively created a monopoly, meaning they do not compete with each other in the majority of markets across the U.S. They just recently changed it back to common carriers so that the FCC can ensure consumers don't get ripped off. If you don't like your crooked politician then vote for someone else. You can't vote out ISP CEOs that rip you off.
I find the ISP's arguement stvpid. If they sold you 25mbps internet connection, what the faq do they care what the users use it for? Their job is to give you 25mbps bandwidth and they have no right to tell you that it should only be used for fb, twitter, insta, yt, etc. From the looks of it, they want to charge the users and the website owner
This was the absolute BEST video analysis/explanation of Net-neutrality I've seen online. I remember watching this back in 2015 when it was first uploaded, so sad that less than 2 years later net-neutrality is under attack again. All because of those greedy ass TeleCommunication companies **sigh**
I think that it's a way of forcing each individual to pay for a service but it can also be used to track each user by connecting him to an account and know exactly who they are and what they do online.
Isn't censoring exactly what this regulations will prevent by not letting the broadband providers discriminate the service they provide you, and letting you choose for yourself? Or did I get something wrong? 🙄
frazzetafan pretty much, your internet will be controlled on what you can see. They will decide what information you receive. It will also, shutdown for hours at a time. You'll be paying for crappy service. Look up Thai and what happened over there with the Internet after net neutrality was blocked.
no. portugal is the way it is because those monopolies are taking advantage of people worldwide. In a place like Portugal they can get away with doing stuff like that because of the laws. I don't think they could get away with it in America, especially if there are other options that are available that don't make you pay premiums for certain packages and give everyone unlimited everything (just like they did with cell phones). If only a few control, then you don't have options and you are double screwed.
Because these issues and arguments have been around long enough to explain it in one minute. So this was overkill, and I think they did a great job at the extras.
Definitely by far the best video you will see showing both sides of the story not just one sided trying to sway your opinion. Great source. Great video 5/5 stars if I could
Comcast and let google NO? They are 2 different company's doing 2 different Things. They need to break-up Comcast. And let the free market dictate. Not Comcast Lobbing DC
Obviously dont know how the world works. Comcast owns all the infrastructure nobody can access Google without comcast and verizons infrastructure. Theoretically they should be bigger then Google.
Cody and Austin If you could've time traveled, someone from the future would've already went back to this time and kill Ijat pai of even when he was born lol
There are two outcomes Either in future People , government etc will support this policy with Establishment of proper infrastructure of everyone needs of Internet...gets fulfilled in terms of Bandwith, Content providing and availability.... or Everything will be Destructed because of harmful sides of Internet and maybe people will move back...
2:06 This doesn't make any sense. Why would they assume that people are using their lines for free? Every ISP charges their customers for data usage, and they usually charge a considerable amount.
Net Neutrality goes way beyond limiting ISPs from blocking content because of its content. Net Neutrality prevents charging based on usage, which is a PERFECTLY VALID BUSINESS MODEL.
Are you shitting me, as a Canadian we have worked SO hard to get rid of usage based internet. Only since a couple of years can we effectively get unlimited bandwidth internet (at very high price). Not so long ago we had very fast connections, with monthly bandwidth limits so low it would take less than 10 minutes of full speed download to bust. Last month i used 460gb of data, which is mosly netflix. It would have cost me almost 1000$ of overusage if i wasnt on an unlimited plan. It's not a valid business model, it's ripping off your customers.
The Netherlands (and countless other European countries) have room for you. We have the happiest kids, good health care, we love to speak English (best English speaking country by second language EF English Proficiency Index) transportation and much more
IF A COMPANY LIKE NETFLIX IS TAKING UP ALL THE DATA THEY SHOULD PAY MORE THAN A WEBSITE USING NO DATA. GEEZ. HOW ELSE IS AN INTERNET PROVIDER ABLE TO STAY IN BUSINESS. PEOPLE ALSO ONLY HAVE ONE SERVICE PROVIDER TO CHOSE FROM BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT REGULATION IS SO HIGH ON THE INTERNET THAT ALL SMALL INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS GO OUT OF BUSINESS BEFORE THEY CAN BECOME BIG
+Archamedies 54 even if a service is taking up all the data, you will still be the one who pays for the "faster internet plans" to access that service, not to mention that ISPs will get the ability to censor "controversial" content, which would be completely unconstitutional if the government did it...
Voltage Drop When more regulation is repealed it will be able to open the internet to the free market. Yes prices may go up at first but then you’ll get much faster internet. What’s wrong with that? Paying more for a better service which over time will become cheaper for the same quality. The free market keeps it in check by not allowing ISPs to not ridiculously raise prices. For your second point, sure they have the ability to. Why would they? They have to admit when they censor stuff (required by law) and once people hear about it they could drop from their isp and join another one. No one wants to lose customers so they wouldn’t do that
You know how you can buy stuff online from Walmart and then pull over to side for the express pick up because they've already pulled & bagged everything and have your purchase waiting for you..... If this were net neutrality you can't do this, it's not fair to other Customers that you get special quick service, so you have to go inside and push a cart & wait forever in one of the 3 registers that are open
As a republican and pretty strong conservative, I agree that net neutrality should remain. I could not imagine what it would be like for my favorite websites to be blocked or demanding purchase.
Your ISP often owns your router. There's nothing technically stopping them from implementing throttling within your network even with NN in place. They don't do this, however, because it's bad for business in the same way that violating the spirit of the open internet prior to 2015 (before NN rules) was bad for business.
"The sticking point is consumers only have one high speed internet provider"... because of government REGULATION !!! Why do people think the solution to a problem caused by Government REGULATION is more Government REGULATION.
Rebutting the “Here’s an analogy” argument referencing FedEx: Do we have postal delivery neutrality? Everyone pays the same and gets what they get? Orrrrrr, do we have different delivery speeds based on what we pay for? Checkmate.
The simple solution is to allow more ISP companies and competition, not more government regulations. If I don't like my service provider, then I can switch to another. That's the free market solution. Government regulations will only slow down development and competition. It will create monopolies where only companies like Comcast and Verizon will be the only choices. It's returning back to the AT&T years where the only phones you can get is in black, corded and hooked to the wall.
right.... because the internet hasnt become the largest, greatest entity on the face of the earth this whole time without being Neutral.. *sarcasm*. They basically just ensured it stays free of greedy providers shutting off parts of the internet!
Tim Johnson They also put in rules that will tie smaller ISP providers from innovating and being able to compete with the behemoth ISPs. When Comcast and Verizon restrict access, as the video points out, the customer base complained and the ISPs quickly changed their minds. The speed and bandwidth of the internet is faster now than it was 5 years ago, and the ISP providers have been developing high-speed solutions to Netflix, gaming, internet TV and medical video technology. Now, that development will stop. Verizon has already announced it will focus more on its wireless technology and move away from being an ISP. What the government has done is created a monopoly for Comcast/Time Warner. The FCC rules also dictate what content will be allowed on the internet. The government gave those greedy providers a blank check at the consumers expense. The WSJ example of Fedex and Amazon is a poor demonstration and not relevant to the internet, since they provide a different market service altogether. The government is using 1934 rules to 21st century technology. It's like regulating the internet with buggy whips.
You truly fucking stupid theres no competition, comcast and verizon dont have competition thats why we are fighting, you problably are a dumbass republican that dont know shit about internet so i am guessing you want your isp control the speed whathever they want ans control the free information that exist today on the internet
Carlos roberto and they will never have competition now that the FCC has enacted these rules which puts in place a monopoly of Comcast/Time Warner and Verizon. Competition makes the internet faster and freer. But you're socials liberal and probably a product of the public education system, and indeed, you have proven you ignorance and intolerance. Beside jackass, you don't need over 300 pages of rules and regulations to prevent ISPs from controlling internet speed.
What is the Great innovation Corporations invited for the Internet NOTHING. Think about it over the years. U-Tube , Google. Were all basically stared out in Garage. Even Older Stuff that has been bought up Lycos (Free-Email). FB, Most streaming services were invented by small start ups. Now they are standard, The corporate solution is Just anther AOL with POP-ups every 2 secs remember those days. The Internet was Paid for by your Tax money yes the phone company's built it. And were allowed to own it If they didn't hog .
Without regulation of ISP's you'll see them eventually lean to a certain platform of media, whether that be a website they own or an app whose company pays them for better connections, this intern would obviously be the opposite of "open" as it cuts out everyone but the people that use those specific apps or websites. What the Net Neutrality regulation is saying is that instead of having a preference of platform or website you have to keep your service open for all possible customers. Why would ISP's want to cut out their customer base? Because they can get a smaller group to pay for more (willing or not in some cases, where ISP's partition land between themselves)and why wouldn't they if they will get more money that way. When I said "willing or not" I'm referring to instances where my brother is living in an apartment complex whose has a contract out with AT&T where they are only allowed to provide their tenets with AT&T at the prices that they offer. He has to shell out the same amount of money I have to do, gets less than 1/10th of my speed, and still has to rent out his modem and has a cap of 200GB even though he is paying for the "Unlimited" plan.
Regulation of the telephone industry ushered in the golden age of innovation that brought instant communication world-wide. Regulating the internet to ensure net neutrality keeps it open to innovation by forbidding corporations from hindering it. Now, get off your mindless talking points.
If you like freedom of choice and not having to get squeezed by a monopolized market, you should like some form of corporate regulation. I feel like this nation already had this discussion back in the 1920s.
this is a misleading video, and the analogy is completely wrong it assumes that their exists only a single shipping entity. a correct analogy would be amazon hires fedex to ship their packages only fedex knowing it's limit on how many packages they can ship with in the 2 day shipping time so it tells UPS they have to take the slack but they will not get payed for their delivery's. the fact is each network has only a limited number of lanes from which to move information if too much information crowds the highway you get congestion and everything slows down, while I agree the company's should not be allowed to block information, they should be able to prioritize information in order to assure those paying the most to move their data are given the greatest priority. Netflix lied their data was slowed down because of cogent's unilateral decision to prioritize the traffic of its retail customers over its wholesale customers, including Netflix. because Cogent had been disfavoring wholesale traffic en route to the ISP. Once Netflix took Cogent out of the loop, the problem went away. Immediately. the fact is Everyone is going to get screwed with net neutrality, everyone's service is going to slow, and become far more expensive. Giving the government the power to regulate the internet is not a good thing does anyone think that giving the government the power to regulate the net to be a good thing? Just look what Obama was able to accomplish with the IRS he used the IRS to prevent conservative groups from obtaining tax free status. the fact is if they have to expand the bandwidth, that money has to come from those who pay for their services, i.e you and me and everyone currently paying for internet services, second if they are forced to provide the same services to everyone then they will have to charge everyone the same price. meaning those currently paying a premium price will no longer pay a premium price given that doing so will not provide them with better service, and to make up for the loss of all those paying a premium price everyone will be forced to pay a higher price for their services. Example say you have 10 paying for internet service. 5 pay $50/month 3 pay $200/month and 2 pay $500/month so $1850 total between the 10 people so for everyone to receive and equal amount of service each person would have to pay $185 per month while the top 5 would receive less band with. Now to increase the number of lanes you would have to raise that now $185/month per person even higher to cover the cost of the new increased bandwidth, either through upgrades of servers, routers, or physical lines such as cable or fiber optic. what is worse is the fact that internet now falls below title 2 regulations the same title 2 that is used to censor radio and TV, the same sensor that puts the "this movie has been edited for content" and bleeps out the F word. the internet is not under the control of the government censors.....
Yeah, basically, you got it right. I wish more people were more understanding of capitalism and markets and why government makes things more inefficent and cumbersome and not better.
Getting rid of the need for choices will only make the problem more permanent. Create an environment where there is a need for choice and businesses will rise up to fill that need. So, to get more options, lower prices and better service, we need to create a need for the businesses that will provide them. Net Neutrality is based on lots of half-thuths and lies.
been noticing slower wifi speeds when streaming games, use to be great but then the service got slow because of my isp, net neutrality does make a difference, especially if you like gaming
Net neutrality doesn't address the problem, it just gives big government more power over companies and consumers. Let's use the FedEx example. If FedEx slowed down the package delivered time, Amazon would find a new carrier. Same thing should apply with internet service providers. You pointed the issue(most Americans only have one service providers), that is what we should be focusing on. We should find out why most Americans only have one service providers and open up opportunities for more service providers. This way if I have Comcast and they started snowing down my internet, I can switch to Google fiber, or charter, or Verizon FiOS, etc... Remove the red tape created by these over lobbied big government and their propaganda.
It takes time and billions to build infrastructure, if you make this change now, people will be stuck with their 1 provider for years, even if they want to switch. When majority has access to 2-3 or more providers such delimitation could be beneficial to the client, atm it would only favor the monopolist.
Does net neutrality treat the amount of data used by each consumer the same as well? Do correct me if I am wrong but I actually do believe that certain contents on the internet transmit and require much more data usage as opposed to other forms of content. As a college student I use the internet for many different forms of content downloading a variety of TV shows and movies, constituting to heavy magnitudes of data flow as compared to my older parents, who barely uses the internet and merely uses it for business emails and reading the occasional news. According to net neutrality all forms and types of data should not be discriminated, but some forms of websites and contents by nature constitutes larger data flow which is inevitable. Why should my parents be paying the same fees as I am if they account to lesser data usage? It sounds about right to me that certain forms of content on the internet should by nature be allowed to constitute different fees to the respective consumers that use it for different purposes. It seems to me that the arguments I find online for net neutrality are heavily biased for it as these people are the ones that frequent the internet the most, the ones most reliant on the internet for their various daily activities. Most of these people, including you and me utilises the internet for all forms of reason, using Facebook for our social media, TH-cam for watching videos, Spotify for listening to music... so it seems absurd that we have to pay a premium for each of these contents. But many of you have to acknowledge that there are also people who do not live on the internet as much as we do, and forcing them to pay the same fees as those who practically live on the internet sounds absurd for them as well. TLDR: Yes we should not discriminate the types of content provided by the internet, but some contents inevitably constitute larger data flow than others. Internet users who use it to watch movies everyday will by nature constitute the majority of traffic flow as compared to someone else who merely uses it to check the occasional news. An analogy would be comparing with someone who uses water utility to water their 1 acre garden. According to net neutrality we should not discriminate these activities as compared to other activities, so everyone who uses water, be it watering their 1 acre garden or flushing the toilet should be seen equally and charged the same water price.
Well according to me Net Neutrality is Sharing Equal Content, Equal Bandwith with unlimited usage...as ever one will be satisfy on basis of Internet needs as a medium.... Data cap limitations is just the way of earning money.... of Cell or Broadband providers... I think This policy will be seen in future when everything will be established and consider Internet as Free... From now it is not possible!
If the internet is like our interstate, highway, and neighborhood road systems we know whose investment paid to pave those roads. But, who's responsible for upkeep, upgrades, and expansion and how is it paid for?
Funny, how everyone is worried about ISP slowing or stopping the provision of service that you pay for, but no one here is worried about the real threat. If Google/ a search engine removing content from all their listings, it doesn't exist/ the information is lost to almost everyone. That should keep you up at night. Also remember that an ISP is a service provider, you can always find different ways/ different ISP's to access the internet with.
The analogy at 1:12 is confusing, If FedEx agrees to deliver their package in 2 days and they don't, they pay for it. If your having bigger truck maintenance expenses and lower profits, that's your problem, should of agree to charge them more.
this is wrong...totally wrong. Netflix is weighing down the truck so all the other packages get delivered slower too. Netflix is a weight on the network....they SHOULD pay more if they are 37 percent of the traffic. That's how utilities AND how free markets work. Adding gov't regulation is rarely a good thing....and is usually favorable to big business. Big tech lobbied the Obama administration hugely over this, and as usual...the wording used is very nice sounding...we're all equal....it's neutral. It's nonsense! And it's been gone for 2+ years now, and everyone has been ok.
The comparison to Fedex is ridiculous. FedEx will negotiate rates with any major shipper based on volume and location to satisfy mutual needs. It would be absurd for FedEx to charge Amazon the same rates as they would charge private individuals or occasional shippers.
What a rediculous point. Their logic is wrong ... The companies aren't using the line, the subscriber paying for the line in the first place is using it based on an agreed limit to the speed that the consumer agrees with the ISP. That's basically like the electricity company saying all electronics providers should pay them because you have electronics like a TV in your home.
The free-market approach has been a part of the Republican mindset for decades. The Republicans are right. The only way to prevent corporations from taking advantage of consumers is providing consumers with options in the form of other corporations, or in this case, other service providers. A free-market forces corporations to compete with each other in order to appeal to the consumer. This philosophy was introduced as a component of Capitalism during the founding of our nation. Sadly, people have been attempting to muffle Capitalism ever since the idea was concieved. We have never been able witness TRUE Capitalism in it's glorious, unregulated form.
Who the hell is downvoting this video? It's a very clear and concise explanation, and gives both sides' arguments nearly completely.
I found it very useful and shared it already a few times.
Because it's not unbiased.
Because it uses the word "Equally" and that's a wishy washy liberal term... or "Trigger word".... ;)
Yellow Jelly Do tell us why Net neutrality is bad
I know your comment is 2 years old but I just want to say that companies use "social media experts" who in turn may use bots that seek out videos / twitter posts / etc.... to upvote and downvote bits of information.
Probably the first time I, as a very strong conservative, disagree with all these Republicans.
As a liberal, I salute you
thanks
Same.. I vote Republican. And I agree with Net neutrality.
Josiah Everson according to polls 98.5% of the country wants net neutrality saved. Which is why I'm wondering why pai is even going through this especially when you consider the parties lack of willingness for gun control. Those 2 things combined are not favorable to him.
Same
What’s also messed up is if you wanna become a small business but don’t wanna pay the internet company, they could shut you down by making it virtually impossible for anyone to see stuff or things you do.
How is it mesed up? It's their company, they can do what they like.
How can you trust anything passed by the chair of the FCC who was the biggest lobbyist for comcast and other ISP's?
Brad Sparks Would you prefer an FCC chairman with no experience in what he is regulating?
***** In 02 ISPs classification was changed from common carriers to information services. In that time the major ISPs have effectively created a monopoly, meaning they do not compete with each other in the majority of markets across the U.S. They just recently changed it back to common carriers so that the FCC can ensure consumers don't get ripped off. If you don't like your crooked politician then vote for someone else. You can't vote out ISP CEOs that rip you off.
deadlylittlefingers yes
Comcast wants Net Neutrality that should tell you there is a problem with net neutrality.
net neutrality is a bs term, it's orwellian, it's not about neutrality, it's to trick liberals.
I find the ISP's arguement stvpid. If they sold you 25mbps internet connection, what the faq do they care what the users use it for? Their job is to give you 25mbps bandwidth and they have no right to tell you that it should only be used for fb, twitter, insta, yt, etc. From the looks of it, they want to charge the users and the website owner
More like-
I think I need money.
Let's control the internet and ask for money to give back control.
*Rich*
I'm about to become a very productive person... when the internet is systematically torn out of my life.
This was the absolute BEST video analysis/explanation of Net-neutrality I've seen online.
I remember watching this back in 2015 when it was first uploaded, so sad that less than 2 years later net-neutrality is under attack again. All because of those greedy ass TeleCommunication companies **sigh**
i loved living in the us... now i dont.. free country huh?
Oh yes you are no longer free because a company that isn't controlled by the government is slowing down your internet.
CJDrawings land of the free
For a fee
Once we are born we become customers. The United States is the biggest business and all citizens are customers
+Andrew H
Sweden?
LOL, sure thing pal. 😂
Net neutrality is the complete opposite of freedom
Once again grateful to be Canadian
+Jonathan
have fun getting arrested for "hate speech" and "misgendering" tumblr kids...
This comment is blocked by your internet provider.
ok
But i already paid $16.99
*So Wall Street Journal is with us*
I think that it's a way of forcing each individual to pay for a service but it can also be used to track each user by connecting him to an account and know exactly who they are and what they do online.
Hugo V yessssssssss new world order.
What is happening to you America? What is happening.
swaarning we are getting screwed by our worthless goverment that's what is happening to us.
so they will be allowed to censor now?
essentially
That's exactly what it means and a huge part of it for them. Control all media and control the people
Isn't censoring exactly what this regulations will prevent by not letting the broadband providers discriminate the service they provide you, and letting you choose for yourself? Or did I get something wrong? 🙄
mspixiedust100 jjbggnp
mspixiedust100 i
Fast forward 2021 we got ads in the middle of videos, paying for every subscription, IT'S ANNOYING
Still alot unanswered with this decision, some of it sounds good, some of it seems fishy, gonna keep my eye on it
frazzetafan pretty much, your internet will be controlled on what you can see. They will decide what information you receive. It will also, shutdown for hours at a time. You'll be paying for crappy service. Look up Thai and what happened over there with the Internet after net neutrality was blocked.
no. portugal is the way it is because those monopolies are taking advantage of people worldwide. In a place like Portugal they can get away with doing stuff like that because of the laws. I don't think they could get away with it in America, especially if there are other options that are available that don't make you pay premiums for certain packages and give everyone unlimited everything (just like they did with cell phones). If only a few control, then you don't have options and you are double screwed.
My flip phone is waiting for me in the attic... bye
How can this video be explained in a short 3 minute clip, when the republicans aren't even aloud to see the bill as of yesterday?
They are at it again.
This time they tried to do it while everyone was too busy with turkey.
They are actually allowed to look at the bill because they are the ones trying to repeal net neutrality in the first place.
Because these issues and arguments have been around long enough to explain it in one minute. So this was overkill, and I think they did a great job at the extras.
JonP227GT I
If this indeed happen , Network Companies are going to lose customers and alot money over this.
0:29 I literally thought someone was calling me on discord lmao
Definitely by far the best video you will see showing both sides of the story not just one sided trying to sway your opinion. Great source. Great video 5/5 stars if I could
just shut down comcast and let google take charge
Comcast and let google NO? They are 2 different company's doing 2 different Things. They need to break-up Comcast. And let the free market dictate. Not Comcast Lobbing DC
I don't know about that, man. Google has been restricting freedom of speech quite a bit lately.
You mean comcrap?
Obviously dont know how the world works. Comcast owns all the infrastructure nobody can access Google without comcast and verizons infrastructure. Theoretically they should be bigger then Google.
Thank you Wall Street Journal... we don't often agree, but on this, not only do we do, you defended it perfectly :).
Time to go back in time to make a better internet.
Cody and Austin
If you could've time traveled, someone from the future would've already went back to this time and kill Ijat pai of even when he was born lol
There are two outcomes
Either in future People , government etc will support this policy with Establishment of proper infrastructure of everyone needs of Internet...gets fulfilled in terms of Bandwith, Content providing and availability....
or
Everything will be Destructed because of harmful sides of Internet and maybe people will move back...
2:06 This doesn't make any sense. Why would they assume that people are using their lines for free? Every ISP charges their customers for data usage, and they usually charge a considerable amount.
Net Neutrality goes way beyond limiting ISPs from blocking content because of its content. Net Neutrality prevents charging based on usage, which is a PERFECTLY VALID BUSINESS MODEL.
Are you shitting me, as a Canadian we have worked SO hard to get rid of usage based internet. Only since a couple of years can we effectively get unlimited bandwidth internet (at very high price). Not so long ago we had very fast connections, with monthly bandwidth limits so low it would take less than 10 minutes of full speed download to bust. Last month i used 460gb of data, which is mosly netflix. It would have cost me almost 1000$ of overusage if i wasnt on an unlimited plan. It's not a valid business model, it's ripping off your customers.
Can't believe this was released today. God bless America, they are going to need it.
The Netherlands (and countless other European countries) have room for you. We have the happiest kids, good health care, we love to speak English (best English speaking country by second language EF English Proficiency Index) transportation and much more
censorship is coming there song. It coming to the UK first, for sure. Then western Europe. Just you wait and see.
But eu is about to kill memes
the fact that the wall street journal made this video shows how important it is
More important is the monopolies like Warner, Spectrum/Charter
warner is now with charter/spectrum ahahah
this video and comments is a great period piece
YEA! we need innovation! like us being forced to pay extra for sites were allready paying for!!
Well they will no longer have the right to block us!!
IF A COMPANY LIKE NETFLIX IS TAKING UP ALL THE DATA THEY SHOULD PAY MORE THAN A WEBSITE USING NO DATA. GEEZ. HOW ELSE IS AN INTERNET PROVIDER ABLE TO STAY IN BUSINESS. PEOPLE ALSO ONLY HAVE ONE SERVICE PROVIDER TO CHOSE FROM BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT REGULATION IS SO HIGH ON THE INTERNET THAT ALL SMALL INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS GO OUT OF BUSINESS BEFORE THEY CAN BECOME BIG
+Archamedies 54
even if a service is taking up all the data, you will still be the one who pays for the "faster internet plans" to access that service, not to mention that ISPs will get the ability to censor "controversial" content, which would be completely unconstitutional if the government did it...
Voltage Drop When more regulation is repealed it will be able to open the internet to the free market. Yes prices may go up at first but then you’ll get much faster internet. What’s wrong with that? Paying more for a better service which over time will become cheaper for the same quality. The free market keeps it in check by not allowing ISPs to not ridiculously raise prices. For your second point, sure they have the ability to. Why would they? They have to admit when they censor stuff (required by law) and once people hear about it they could drop from their isp and join another one. No one wants to lose customers so they wouldn’t do that
How did this age? Just curious
these providers are playing god for profit
Just cuz its rumored that it might be going away doesn’t give people the right to dislike this video
Who’s watching this December 14, 2017
well, you are sir
Jens Appelgreen i am
Who cares what date someone watched this?
Aiden GG actually fyi the internet was supposed to cost money on the 14th of december but now were still voting
Jens Appelgreen I’m watching this on June 30th 2018.
News flash:
Nothing happened to me yet.
You know how you can buy stuff online from Walmart and then pull over to side for the express pick up because they've already pulled & bagged everything and have your purchase waiting for you.....
If this were net neutrality you can't do this, it's not fair to other Customers that you get special quick service, so you have to go inside and push a cart & wait forever in one of the 3 registers that are open
Oh, shut up, WSJ! You guys are part of the reason we're in this jam!
How?
As a republican and pretty strong conservative, I agree that net neutrality should remain. I could not imagine what it would be like for my favorite websites to be blocked or demanding purchase.
Well there you go! Y’all wanted trump as your president! Great job america
TMT 50 It was Obama you established it and put it at the forefront
TMT 50 trump uses the net as much as we do... I don't think it's him...
Your ISP often owns your router. There's nothing technically stopping them from implementing throttling within your network even with NN in place. They don't do this, however, because it's bad for business in the same way that violating the spirit of the open internet prior to 2015 (before NN rules) was bad for business.
"The sticking point is consumers only have one high speed internet provider"... because of government REGULATION !!! Why do people think the solution to a problem caused by Government REGULATION is more Government REGULATION.
It's not "more" government regulation it just keeps big businesses from monopolizing on something that is suppose to be free.
@@melancholynights6833 Trumptards cannot think. Thinking makes their brains go haywire.
Rebutting the “Here’s an analogy” argument referencing FedEx: Do we have postal delivery neutrality? Everyone pays the same and gets what they get? Orrrrrr, do we have different delivery speeds based on what we pay for? Checkmate.
its propaganda
Thank you for repealing net neutrality! Helps content makers like me have more competition.
The simple solution is to allow more ISP companies and competition, not more government regulations. If I don't like my service provider, then I can switch to another. That's the free market solution. Government regulations will only slow down development and competition. It will create monopolies where only companies like Comcast and Verizon will be the only choices. It's returning back to the AT&T years where the only phones you can get is in black, corded and hooked to the wall.
LOL
right.... because the internet hasnt become the largest, greatest entity on the face of the earth this whole time without being Neutral.. *sarcasm*. They basically just ensured it stays free of greedy providers shutting off parts of the internet!
Tim Johnson They also put in rules that will tie smaller ISP providers from innovating and being able to compete with the behemoth ISPs. When Comcast and Verizon restrict access, as the video points out, the customer base complained and the ISPs quickly changed their minds.
The speed and bandwidth of the internet is faster now than it was 5 years ago, and the ISP providers have been developing high-speed solutions to Netflix, gaming, internet TV and medical video technology. Now, that development will stop. Verizon has already announced it will focus more on its wireless technology and move away from being an ISP. What the government has done is created a monopoly for Comcast/Time Warner. The FCC rules also dictate what content will be allowed on the internet. The government gave those greedy providers a blank check at the consumers expense.
The WSJ example of Fedex and Amazon is a poor demonstration and not relevant to the internet, since they provide a different market service altogether. The government is using 1934 rules to 21st century technology. It's like regulating the internet with buggy whips.
You truly fucking stupid theres no competition, comcast and verizon dont have competition thats why we are fighting, you problably are a dumbass republican that dont know shit about internet so i am guessing you want your isp control the speed whathever they want ans control the free information that exist today on the internet
Carlos roberto and they will never have competition now that the FCC has enacted these rules which puts in place a monopoly of Comcast/Time Warner and Verizon. Competition makes the internet faster and freer. But you're socials liberal and probably a product of the public education system, and indeed, you have proven you ignorance and intolerance. Beside jackass, you don't need over 300 pages of rules and regulations to prevent ISPs from controlling internet speed.
"All content on the internet should be treated equally"
Should be read as: "All content on the internet should be treated fairly" 😊
i hope the internet just completely stops, then we will be free from this curse
If internet stops it would be apocalyptic. So no thanks.
sofacus
Toy story quote
"You are a sad, strange little man..."
U have mad gaming vids so why r u saying to destroy the internet
If the internet stops. . .We wouldn't advance at all and we would all be in the dark ages again.
0:20
No matter your opinion on Net Neutrality, you got to admit,
That streaming video example with the screaming goat was pretty good.
how does regulation = free and open anything??
oxymoron.
What is the Great innovation Corporations invited for the Internet NOTHING. Think about it over the years. U-Tube , Google. Were all basically stared out in Garage. Even Older Stuff that has been bought up Lycos (Free-Email). FB, Most streaming services were invented by small start ups. Now they are standard, The corporate solution is Just anther AOL with POP-ups every 2 secs remember those days. The Internet was Paid for by your Tax money yes the phone company's built it. And were allowed to own it If they didn't hog .
Without regulation of ISP's you'll see them eventually lean to a certain platform of media, whether that be a website they own or an app whose company pays them for better connections, this intern would obviously be the opposite of "open" as it cuts out everyone but the people that use those specific apps or websites.
What the Net Neutrality regulation is saying is that instead of having a preference of platform or website you have to keep your service open for all possible customers. Why would ISP's want to cut out their customer base? Because they can get a smaller group to pay for more (willing or not in some cases, where ISP's partition land between themselves)and why wouldn't they if they will get more money that way.
When I said "willing or not" I'm referring to instances where my brother is living in an apartment complex whose has a contract out with AT&T where they are only allowed to provide their tenets with AT&T at the prices that they offer. He has to shell out the same amount of money I have to do, gets less than 1/10th of my speed, and still has to rent out his modem and has a cap of 200GB even though he is paying for the "Unlimited" plan.
Regulation of the telephone industry ushered in the golden age of innovation that brought instant communication world-wide. Regulating the internet to ensure net neutrality keeps it open to innovation by forbidding corporations from hindering it. Now, get off your mindless talking points.
Google Red Herring fallacy, or just take a basic English 101 course then come back
If you like freedom of choice and not having to get squeezed by a monopolized market, you should like some form of corporate regulation. I feel like this nation already had this discussion back in the 1920s.
I'm not even kidding when I say that the ad answered my question!
this is a misleading video, and the analogy is completely wrong it assumes that their exists only a single shipping entity. a correct analogy would be amazon hires fedex to ship their packages only fedex knowing it's limit on how many packages they can ship with in the 2 day shipping time so it tells UPS they have to take the slack but they will not get payed for their delivery's. the fact is each network has only a limited number of lanes from which to move information if too much information crowds the highway you get congestion and everything slows down, while I agree the company's should not be allowed to block information, they should be able to prioritize information in order to assure those paying the most to move their data are given the greatest priority. Netflix lied their data was slowed down because of cogent's unilateral decision to prioritize the traffic of its retail customers over its wholesale customers, including Netflix. because Cogent had been disfavoring wholesale traffic en route to the ISP. Once Netflix took Cogent out of the loop, the problem went away. Immediately. the fact is Everyone is going to get screwed with net neutrality, everyone's service is going to slow, and become far more expensive. Giving the government the power to regulate the internet is not a good thing does anyone think that giving the government the power to regulate the net to be a good thing? Just look what Obama was able to accomplish with the IRS he used the IRS to prevent conservative groups from obtaining tax free status. the fact is if they have to expand the bandwidth, that money has to come from those who pay for their services, i.e you and me and everyone currently paying for internet services, second if they are forced to provide the same services to everyone then they will have to charge everyone the same price. meaning those currently paying a premium price will no longer pay a premium price given that doing so will not provide them with better service, and to make up for the loss of all those paying a premium price everyone will be forced to pay a higher price for their services. Example say you have 10 paying for internet service. 5 pay $50/month 3 pay $200/month and 2 pay $500/month so $1850 total between the 10 people so for everyone to receive and equal amount of service each person would have to pay $185 per month while the top 5 would receive less band with. Now to increase the number of lanes you would have to raise that now $185/month per person even higher to cover the cost of the new increased bandwidth, either through upgrades of servers, routers, or physical lines such as cable or fiber optic. what is worse is the fact that internet now falls below title 2 regulations the same title 2 that is used to censor radio and TV, the same sensor that puts the "this movie has been edited for content" and bleeps out the F word. the internet is not under the control of the government censors.....
John Galt haha you spent time typing a long TH-cam comment and who gained anything from it? No one
Yeah, basically, you got it right. I wish more people were more understanding of capitalism and markets and why government makes things more inefficent and cumbersome and not better.
Weird because amazon is contracted with Usps due to lower last mile rates.
Ben Lockwood
But u responded tho... Haha! Ur just jealous cuz u wanted to be the kid who knows how this works. Lol
Yawn. If you're making a point, make it brief and concise. Just providing feedback yo
Back in the day : everyone should be treated equally, 2017: everything on the internet should be treated equally
I never thought the Wall Street Journal would give an honest report on net neutrality!!!
And WHO is explaining Net Neutrality right now? Yes. The Wall Street Journal of all businesses.
Good video. Thank you so much for sharing it. God bless you. 😊
There is already a lack of competition...
Most Americans rarely have more than 3 internet providers to choose from.
Except this video is not telling the truth.
Getting rid of the need for choices will only make the problem more permanent. Create an environment where there is a need for choice and businesses will rise up to fill that need. So, to get more options, lower prices and better service, we need to create a need for the businesses that will provide them. Net Neutrality is based on lots of half-thuths and lies.
Great explanation. Thank you...
This! I use the Amazon/parcel example all this time!
If an individual citizen is forced to obey the law of freedom of speech, why are big companies not forced to do so?!
been noticing slower wifi speeds when streaming games, use to be great but then the service got slow because of my isp, net neutrality does make a difference, especially if you like gaming
Net neutrality doesn't address the problem, it just gives big government more power over companies and consumers. Let's use the FedEx example. If FedEx slowed down the package delivered time, Amazon would find a new carrier. Same thing should apply with internet service providers. You pointed the issue(most Americans only have one service providers), that is what we should be focusing on. We should find out why most Americans only have one service providers and open up opportunities for more service providers. This way if I have Comcast and they started snowing down my internet, I can switch to Google fiber, or charter, or Verizon FiOS, etc... Remove the red tape created by these over lobbied big government and their propaganda.
It takes time and billions to build infrastructure, if you make this change now, people will be stuck with their 1 provider for years, even if they want to switch. When majority has access to 2-3 or more providers such delimitation could be beneficial to the client, atm it would only favor the monopolist.
Does net neutrality treat the amount of data used by each consumer the same as well? Do correct me if I am wrong but I actually do believe that certain contents on the internet transmit and require much more data usage as opposed to other forms of content. As a college student I use the internet for many different forms of content downloading a variety of TV shows and movies, constituting to heavy magnitudes of data flow as compared to my older parents, who barely uses the internet and merely uses it for business emails and reading the occasional news. According to net neutrality all forms and types of data should not be discriminated, but some forms of websites and contents by nature constitutes larger data flow which is inevitable. Why should my parents be paying the same fees as I am if they account to lesser data usage? It sounds about right to me that certain forms of content on the internet should by nature be allowed to constitute different fees to the respective consumers that use it for different purposes.
It seems to me that the arguments I find online for net neutrality are heavily biased for it as these people are the ones that frequent the internet the most, the ones most reliant on the internet for their various daily activities. Most of these people, including you and me utilises the internet for all forms of reason, using Facebook for our social media, TH-cam for watching videos, Spotify for listening to music... so it seems absurd that we have to pay a premium for each of these contents. But many of you have to acknowledge that there are also people who do not live on the internet as much as we do, and forcing them to pay the same fees as those who practically live on the internet sounds absurd for them as well.
TLDR: Yes we should not discriminate the types of content provided by the internet, but some contents inevitably constitute larger data flow than others. Internet users who use it to watch movies everyday will by nature constitute the majority of traffic flow as compared to someone else who merely uses it to check the occasional news. An analogy would be comparing with someone who uses water utility to water their 1 acre garden. According to net neutrality we should not discriminate these activities as compared to other activities, so everyone who uses water, be it watering their 1 acre garden or flushing the toilet should be seen equally and charged the same water price.
Well according to me Net Neutrality is Sharing Equal Content, Equal Bandwith with unlimited usage...as ever one will be satisfy on basis of Internet needs as a medium....
Data cap limitations is just the way of earning money.... of Cell or Broadband providers...
I think This policy will be seen in future when everything will be established and consider Internet as Free... From now it is not possible!
This is new
First time I ever agreed with the WSJ
I got an net neutrality ad at the start of this video and this is happening in 2017
Amazon mostly ships with UPS and USPS... As well as that other same day delivery company. Ya'll lying.
This vid is from 2015 And sadly 2 years later here we go again....
Thanks for the explanation..
If the internet is like our interstate, highway, and neighborhood road systems we know whose investment paid to pave those roads. But, who's responsible for upkeep, upgrades, and expansion and how is it paid for?
Wall Street journal is my city!!
The Beast333 no. Just no.
Guys calm down, nothing really happened
Ladies and gentleman a revolution must begin.
Funny, how everyone is worried about ISP slowing or stopping the provision of service that you pay for, but no one here is worried about the real threat. If Google/ a search engine removing content from all their listings, it doesn't exist/ the information is lost to almost everyone. That should keep you up at night.
Also remember that an ISP is a service provider, you can always find different ways/ different ISP's to access the internet with.
Nicely explained.
TH-cam doesn't like it. The smaller channels are handled much slower. Compare skipping forward on a 500 subs and a million subs channel...
The analogy at 1:12 is confusing, If FedEx agrees to deliver their package in 2 days and they don't, they pay for it. If your having bigger truck maintenance expenses and lower profits, that's your problem, should of agree to charge them more.
Is it bad I got an ad explaining this better than the video
this is wrong...totally wrong. Netflix is weighing down the truck so all the other packages get delivered slower too. Netflix is a weight on the network....they SHOULD pay more if they are 37 percent of the traffic. That's how utilities AND how free markets work. Adding gov't regulation is rarely a good thing....and is usually favorable to big business. Big tech lobbied the Obama administration hugely over this, and as usual...the wording used is very nice sounding...we're all equal....it's neutral. It's nonsense! And it's been gone for 2+ years now, and everyone has been ok.
The comparison to Fedex is ridiculous. FedEx will negotiate rates with any major shipper based on volume and location to satisfy mutual needs. It would be absurd for FedEx to charge Amazon the same rates as they would charge private individuals or occasional shippers.
Clearly stated. Nice job.
This is a causal skewed vid that preys on reaction and emotion. Govt wont help you in this ladies and gents.
there is nothing that can justify changing this
What a rediculous point.
Their logic is wrong ... The companies aren't using the line, the subscriber paying for the line in the first place is using it based on an agreed limit to the speed that the consumer agrees with the ISP.
That's basically like the electricity company saying all electronics providers should pay them because you have electronics like a TV in your home.
Called,"Restoring Internet Freedom Act" - *throws back head and laughs*. Can't fool me, Ajit V. Pai!
The journal fails to mention many laws in place that already prevent the types of things that are talked about in the video.
WRONG WRONG WRONG AND WRONG! Sigh. People will never get this right. I give up.
I really liked editing the video.
and I would like to know:
which software is the basis of editing this video?
cordially
Unfortunately the only ISP that supports my community is Comcast. I have no options. That means no competition for Comcast.
Just wanna commend this content creator this was the least bias explanation I've seen in the almost 2 hours of my reasearch
The free-market approach has been a part of the Republican mindset for decades. The Republicans are right. The only way to prevent corporations from taking advantage of consumers is providing consumers with options in the form of other corporations, or in this case, other service providers. A free-market forces corporations to compete with each other in order to appeal to the consumer. This philosophy was introduced as a component of Capitalism during the founding of our nation. Sadly, people have been attempting to muffle Capitalism ever since the idea was concieved. We have never been able witness TRUE Capitalism in it's glorious, unregulated form.
Probably the best video Wall Street has posted since they fucked over TH-cam with the adpocalypse
2:03 dafuq man I thought it was Luke Walton Jr. 😂
Why I plan on getting a lot of VPN setups onto a USB just incase I need to install one and the website is blocked
I'm dumb so will this contribute to a 2019 depression? Just wondering
Vihart explains it much better