By LumosJared on Dec 13, 2017 at 6:19 PM
  1. LumosJared

    LumosJared Director Staff Member Direction3

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2012
    Messages:
    3,880
    Likes Received:
    1,609
    Hey folks. We usually stay far, far away from politics here, but as most of you are aware, this topic is integral to Massivecraft as a business and a community.

    Tree.png

    In the United States, the Federal Communications Commision (FCC) has been able to stop ISP's from selectively slowing down internet speed for particular services. Your connection to the internet cannot pick favorites when it comes to the content you consume. The laws making this so, in particular, Title 2, are known as "Net Neutrality". Without this oversight, for example, Comcast could make the internet speed of its clients on Bing hyper fast, while Google runs at a slog. But consider the impact on smaller communities. If Mojang decided to run their own corporate multiplayer roleplay/factions server, and slow down internet speed around Massivecraft, they can effectively squash any and all smaller business, and inhibit growth. If Youtube wanted to kill a smaller streaming service by paying ISP's to slow down the ability of anyone to even connect to their website, it stifles competition in the marketplace. If you're convinced that future would be problematic, and are a United States citizen, here is what you can do.

    Go to the website "battleforthenet.com", where you will be carefully guided into not only finding out who your representative is, but what to say to get your opinions across. Regardless of age, you are a constituent of your state, and your voice does have an impact in large numbers.

    Alternatively, go to the url "gofccyourself.com" and click on "Express". Here, you can leave comments directly to the FCC. Among your respectful comments, specifically state you support strong net neutrality, backed by title 2 oversight of ISP's. Or, maybe you agree with Ajit Pai's plan. Your voice is important too. For more info on what you can do, see this thread.

    Border 2.png

    Unless you are the children of the owner of Verizon, or Ajit Pai, repealing Net Neutrality is an active threat. Massivecraft simply wouldn't be where it is without Title 2 Oversight. Thank you all for reading.

    Have a Massive Day.
     
    • Winner x 42
    • Agree x 6
    • Thank You! x 2
    • Informative x 2
    • Useful x 2
    • Like x 1
    • Cuddles! x 1
    • Powerful x 1
    • Optimistic x 1

Comments

Discussion in 'Server News and Announcements' started by LumosJared, Dec 13, 2017.

    1. AtticCat
      AtticCat
      Why
    2. Jalapeno690
      Jalapeno690
      Why
    3. ZiHAMMER
      ZiHAMMER
      All heil Jesus Frankenstein
    4. Sozzer
      Sozzer
      You do understand I'm pulling from the actual state of affairs over here, right?
    5. 65jes89
      65jes89
      No, actually.

      https://arstechnica.com/information...-one-25mbps-internet-provider-or-none-at-all/

      https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/7gssiw/here_is_a_map_showing_areas_of_the_us_served_by_a/

      In America there is a very large amount of places who only have one isp option; they essentially have a monopoly. The thing with a monopoly is that you can do basically anything you want with your prices without worrying about competitors; you only have to worry about keeping a demand.

      You’ve made the argument that if ISPs actually lower speeds, people will just leave. The issue is, where are they leaving to? In this day and age, the internet is essentially a utility; you cannot function properly as a member of society without it, whether you need it for work, shopping, communication, paying bills, etc. You have to have internet. Which means that in areas (such as my own) where there is only one feasible ISP available, you just have to suck up whatever they give you.

      ISPs in modern America fundamentally work to undermine capitalism and gain monopolies over areas so that the consumer can’t do jack about it. Your argument that consumers will leave and lose money for the ISP assumes that the consumer has a choice, that capitalism applies. If there were 20 ISP options available in every house in America, I’d agree with you, screw net neutrality, let capitalism do its job. But there’s not.

      If you’ve studied American history at all, think of it like the oil tycoons like Rockefeller who made fortunes off of monopolies before the trust busting at the turn of the 20th century. In that case, the solution was to break up monopolies. In the case of the internet, this isn’t currently feasible in a reasonable time period, and so we have to resort to regulation of the monopolies, I.e. net neutrality.

      Think about how this would look if it were electricity. Electricity is legally a utility in the U.S., and so is currently heavily regulated, even though it’s ran by private corporations. But if we did to electricity what we’re now doing to the internet, it would be like your power company saying “sorry, from now on we’re only going to give electricity to televisions with our special microchip, which is conveniently only on Samsung televisions.” People would be furious. But you know what would happen? You’d go out and buy a Samsung television. Your electricity company would lose an insignificant number of customers, if any, and would also make money from Samsung paying them to enact this policy.

      And yes, ISPs absolutely would. They’ve already tried.

      https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/net-neutrality-violations-history/

      And that was when it was illegal.
    6. Genecide65
    7. Bearacuda
      Bearacuda
      Gene stop posting this in the discord, your joke wasn’t funny.
    8. Siosie
      Siosie
      I thought it was pretty funny.
    9. Jalapeno690
      Jalapeno690
      Relight my fire
    10. soapboxstage
      soapboxstage
      Ok I would like to begin by expressing my surprise at the fact that I thought I'd never see a comment like this on the forums, especially not written by a staff. This really shows how this impacts many communities. I came back because I was really bred but wow massive has changed, a bit.
      I'm no net nutrality expert but I found this comment humorous. I also find this point interesting and the example of phone carriers really represents the idea clearly.
      They kinda did... But I like this concept. If you have to pay to use a website, an it's one of the only websites that does it, you wouldn't use that website necessarily.
      The examples shown here are interesting. The figurative idea of electricity monitoring shows an extreme example but creates the foundation of a solid point. You're counter argument that many people have only one ISP choice is well supported and convincing. Though, I haven't read through your sources yet, I feel the general citation style works well for your point.

      Based on the evidence presented, I feel that the removal of net nutrality is likely to be detrimental to the lives of many people and may reach outside the U.S. due to the international nature of many companies as someone previously mentioned. A large resource for most of the world could have an extra fee added. It came to me with concern when net nutrality was repealed and the debate here had convinced me that net nutrality is good. People may have multiple choices but "If they all do the same thing, they can basically do whatever they want." The idea that if companies can screw people over for extra money they will showed me concern. People with only one ISP option will be screwed, with no other options.
      Maybe people will learn to not use the internet but hopefully they will not pass through congress.

      That's my response. Sorry for the redundancy and aweful format I'm on my phone at a "pep rally" that err body is brig forced to go to and it's pretty earrapie in here.
    11. Last_Link
      Last_Link
      Yessss, cry your salty tears into my giant mug so that I might present them to my father in exchange for the love he never gave me
    12. Genecide65
    13. SuperSaiyanWoff
      SuperSaiyanWoff
      It actually creates competition in the market. See Free Market Economics 101.
    14. Metallum_
      Metallum_
      Sometimes I wish I could care
    15. MrScafuto
      MrScafuto
      Lmao no it doesn’t. It just enables monopolies and user exploitation, nice meme though.
    16. 65jes89
      65jes89
      Competition between the two ISPs in the area who probably have a deal with one another to keep prices artificially high, ye.
    17. SuperSaiyanWoff
      SuperSaiyanWoff
      To those of you saying most places only have one isp, that is totally false.

      Local isp's are popping up everywhere including my old hometown which is a super small town. Most major cell phone companies are also isp's now. There is way more than just one isp to an area and to totally shut out how markets function on this is just silly.

      Let the market it do its thing. The United States government dabbling in the market creates more monopolies than these "evil" corporations.
    18. Winterless
      Winterless
      Sleazy deals happen much more often between the government and ISPs. Why do you think 3 companies dominate the entire US for internet service?
    19. Winterless
      Winterless
      In the years leading up to net neutrality, the FCC were only able to find 6 incidents of anti-competitive or abusive behaviour by ISPs, all of which were "relatively minor." There are already regulations in place to stop this nightmare scenario like the Sherman Act. This behaviour didn't happen on a large scale before net neutrality, and it won't happen now. It's literally all fearmongering by big companies because they want to avoid paying higher prices for bandwidth.
    20. GoldRush
      GoldRush
      I know I'm late to this but... On average I get between 0.5 MbPs - 15MbPs, and never once got over 25MbPs (Netflix kills the internet!) So I'm not sure if you can get much slower than that!

Share This Page