Fiverr Forum

Net Neutrality and Related

_Mod Note: Branched off from another thread and continued here:_

it’s rare to see sites actually become more user friendly and relaxed as time goes on and usually the opposite happens. There are various tightenings of rules, proceedures, how the site operates, the friendliness goes away.

That’s how it happens but whether it results in greater profits or not I’m not sure, but I have seen sites fold over time also. I’m sure fiverr won’t though. Just saying that sites evolve into much more regulated tightly controlled structures over time. It’s inevitable as sites try to find ways to eliminate problems.

Net neutrality has only been in existence for 2 years, there was a robust Internet long before. And it only pertains to pricing and bandwidth issues, it has nothing to do with content.

It was little more than a government overreach as to the pricing of bandwidth, the same government that does such a great job regulating so many other industries. Not.

1 Like

That is another entire topic we could argue about.

It’s like allowing roads to all decide to charge various tolls for cars to use them instead of having all roads available to all cars at the same rate.

And the roads the most people depend on will now charge huge fees and there is nothing anyone can do about it— pay up or don’t use them.

1 Like

It is like allowing some restaurants to charge $100 for a steak while other charge $15, or allowing airlines to have a first class section. I don’t understand why people have such a hard time realizing that you can pay for small, medium or large when you order fries. Same thing here.

Imagine if the government decided to apply social justice to steak prices. Every restaurant would serve a piece of shoe leather for $20. No choice.

Remember these are the same folks who bring you the IRS and the DMV.

1 Like

No it’s not like that since restaurants are not something everyone depends on for their jobs or life. It’s not like we can shop around for the best internet.

We all use the same internet. We all depend on it. We all are at the mercy of internet providers.

Of course you can. I have 4 choices right now as far as ISP’s and they all have different plans.I have Google Fiber Gigabit internet, what about the 75 year old lady next door who only checks email, she probably pays Time Warner $20 a month bundles with landline, while I pay $150 for gigabit. What’s wrong with that?

AT&T runs TV commercials here that if you are on foodstamps you can get Hi speed internet for $10 per month. Guess who picks up the difference? You and me.

Ah I see, you don’t understand how this works. I’m not going into it here but you have a misunderstanding of the whole thing. And I have Comcast and ATT only where I live and many places only have one provider.

With all due respect, Radio/TV/cable/internet this has been my profession for a lifetime. I suggest you read up a bit.

Internet has been mine from when it started. I’m surprised you don’t realize that many places only have one internet company. I have two. One is not even cable, it comes through the phone lines. I really don’t feel like discussing this more. What’s the point.

Does that mean that the government has the authority to sieze price control? I am sure the plans in those places are reasonably priced, if not there would be no customers. I am wiling to bet that most folks in those areas have 300 TV channels hi speed internet at a decent price, otherwise no one would buy.

The fact that you misrepresent what “Net Neutrality is” I dont wish to argue either, but you are posting some very misinformed statements as to what it is all about.

I’m talking about internet, not TV. And the decent price can now be a thing of the past at any time and we will have to pay whatever they want to charge us if we want internet but this is not even what it’s all about. Seriously you don’t understand but I don’t want to discuss it any more here.

Wow. OK, I don’t understand. Wow.

1 Like

Sorry, you do understand; it’s all good.

1 Like


Puppies fix everything.


I agree with Newsmike when it comes to Net Neutrality. Almost every bit of fearmongering you hear from Vox and Huffington Post about how drastic not having Net Neutrality would be is complete BS.

This is not the first time the Mainstream Media made things out to be much worse than they are, and definitely will not be the last time they do. I have been researching effective and proper journalistic practices as well as ethical journalism for years now, and I trust almost no news outlets when it comes to properly sourcing and retelling the news.

This is made 1000 times worse in the Science and Technology sector, where sensationalism takes precedence over facts.

The reality is that ISP’s are not stupid, and despite wanting money, will find ways to make it by using the already established mainframe of the internet. That is what they have done for decades before Net Neutrality, and will continue doing after Net Neutrality ends.

To pretend that selling high bandwidths at higher prices is a bad thing is crazy. Preventing a company from such because you personally like the bandwidth that you currently have the privilege of for the price you have it for is rather selfish.

Yes. We all need the internet to work. But the only thing that Net Neutrality protects is big corporations who otherwise have to pay more taxes for using more bandwidth.

1 Like

I suggest this thread be closed.

I love tuning into MSNBC :tv:

  • Rachel Maddow
  • Chris Hayes
  • Lawrence O’Donnell
  • Joy Reed

Gotta love Richard Painter, too. :smiley:

There is a difference between understanding all of the raw data and knowing the field you are arguing about instead of just reading some random news article or social media post and making inaccurate claims that can be dismissed even by looking at Snopes to see if the information is fake or not.

Why start an argument if when people disagree with you, you requests threads to be closed? All you have to do is defend your claims with credible sources, and preferably not a social media meme or a news article.