California approves net neutrality bill -- consumers there about to get slammed so hard
 

Let's see what happens when all these libtards realize things like no more free Spotify data and that streaming services operated by the ISP now count against their data plan. They will hit their bandwidth cap the first week of the month and have to either suffer through throttling or PAY UP for more bandwidth.




https://www.slashgear.com/california...ntry-01544192/

Friday was a day of celebration for net neutrality proponents, as California’s legislature approved a bill that, once passed into law, is widely seen as the strongest protection in the country. The bill, SB822, not only restores the net neutrality rules that were put into place by former President Barack Obama, but goes even to ban internet service providers from practices like throttling in favor of select content and zero-rating services.
...
Also banned is zero-rating, or when ISPs offer free data, but only for the use of specific apps or services, in turn favoring certain companies over others.

Start your own state. Call it Nazihoma. All your friends can live there sheet free.

You don't seem to understand what net neutrality is.

Right now with the way the laws are, one company (YouTube) might go to an ISP (AT&T) and make a deal with them where they pay $100 million a year to have no data caps on their product and ask them to throttle other similar products like Netflix, Hulu, Sling, or Amazon Prime. Meaning.... If you use that ISP and you use Netflix to stream movies, you might not be able to because that ISP prefers YouTube over Netflix.

No one is going to pay more to use one project. In fact, just the opposite - this protect us from an ISP saying "You use Hulu and we throttle Hulu users, so if you want to use Hulu you have to pay us extra".

you must be joking and completely unaware that verizon throttled the california firefighters UNLIMITED data while they were fighting the biggest fires in cali history that extended the time it took to fight the fires and jeopardized lives.

you think that's OK. got it.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...alif-wildfire/

"County Fire has experienced throttling by its ISP, Verizon," Santa Clara County Fire Chief Anthony Bowden wrote in a declaration. "This throttling has had a significant impact on our ability to provide emergency services. Verizon imposed these limitations despite being informed that throttling was actively impeding County Fire's ability to provide crisis-response and essential emergency services."

That has nothing to do with NN.

They exceeded the limits of their plan and got throttled.

So if someone is listening to Spotify all day long, every day right now and their ISP offers data-free access to Spotify, you are saying NN is going to change nothing for that user?

according to reality:

Verizon Wireless' throttling of a fire department that uses its data services has been submitted as evidence in a lawsuit that seeks to reinstate federal net neutrality rules.


The Santa Clara fire department has responded to Verizon's claim that the throttling was just a customer service error and "has nothing to do with net neutrality." To the contrary, "Verizon's throttling has everything to do with net neutrality," a county official said.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...or-throttling/

You are one of the dumbest idiots to ever post on this forum, so I don't even know why I'm debating this with you.

From the article you posted:
Verizon said the department had chosen an unlimited data plan that gets throttled to speeds of 200kbps or 600kbps after using 25GB a month but that Verizon failed to follow its policy of "remov[ing] data speed restrictions when contacted in emergency situations."


This is not a NN issue because it involved the ISP throttling a customer's use of the entire ISP service (meaning every single thing on their devices was throttled from YouTube to GFY to FTP servers to IRC). This would potentially be a NN issue had the fire department been using Facebook messenger to communicate and Verizon throttled Facebook messenger for all of their customers. But that's not anywhere near what happened.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

you think I'm debating you when in fact i'm rubbing your nose in your own shit.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

You are incapable of putting up rebuttals. I know your game. You come in with something stupid, get called out on it and then you post something like this.

You seem to be stuck on Spotify. This is a music streaming service. It's hardly bandwidth intensive these days. You could stream Spotify on every device you own for entire month and still not use 1/100th of your bandwidth plan.

Yes, a company could still offer you free bandwidth for Spotify if they wish. At the same time, they would not be able to say "We offer you free bandwidth for Spotify, but if you use Amazon Music we charge you extra".

Without net neutrality a company would be able to say "We have a deal in place with Amazon Music, but if you want to use Spotify we have the legal right to throttle it" which makes it pretty much worthless. One company could form a partnership with your Internet provider and more or less lock out all of their competitors. That's just bad business, and bad for the consumers.

My Internet company should not be able to choose what streaming services I use. What if you Internet company has a deal in place with Amazon Prime, but you want to watch something on Netflix and they can throttle it so every thirty seconds it buffers.

How is anyone not fully behind net neutrality?

that's because your troll is 3rd grade level troll. you're yapping that it's OK for a carrier to throttle emergency services in the middle of an emergency and that has nothing to do with net neutrality.

that's 3rd grade level logic. If this weren't an adult board, I'd have a 4th grader come in here and bitch slap you with 4th grader logic.

They got throttled because they had a data plan with $x of gigs and they went over it. Nothing to do with NN whatsoever. If you cannot fathom that you are not thinking, clearly.