WA Gov: ISP's Can Suck It

[kalm]

OLYMPIA – Washington will enforce its own version of net neutrality if the Federal Communications Commission votes Thursday to change national rules, Gov. Jay Inslee said Wednesday.

Standing with a bipartisan group of lawmakers, tech executives and state Attorney General Bob Ferguson, Inslee said internet service providers that restrict access, block content or charge varying rates to different customers could find themselves facing sanctions from the state.

“There are some things worth fighting for,” Inslee said. “This is a free-speech issue as well as a business development issue.”.................

If the commission approves the current draft rules, or something close to them, Washington will try to keep ISPs that offer service inside its borders from changing, Inslee said.

The state could bring consumer protection actions against ISPs that take those steps, could refuse to contract with those that aren’t net neutral, or could ask the Utilities and Transportation Commission to deny them access to utility poles and work with public utility districts to provide internet service in areas they serve, he said.

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2017/d ... ate-if-fc/

[∞∞∞]

Good for Washington; I hope ALL states follow that lead, although I know they won't.

I read something like 80%+ of Americans are against the death of net-neutrality, which overwhelmingly makes it one of the few items a majority of people are united about. And yet here we are.

IMO, a net-neutral internet is essential to the American economy. It's the modern version of the highway interstate system, spurring economic growth and efficiently connecting people and businesses.

[CAA Flagship]

https://www.engadget.com/2017/12/14/fak ... dentities/

Two million identities stolen for fake net neutrality comments

As many as 2 million identities were stolen to leave fake comments in support of the FCC's decision to kill net neutrality, according to the New York Attorney General's Office. Based on the 5,000 or so complaints filed with the office, some of the victims are senior citizens, some are minors, while some are already dead. "This is a 13 year old child -- she did not post this comment, nor did anyone else in her household," a report filed by a New Yorker said. A Chicago resident who also filed a complaint called the fake comment made under their mother's name "sickening." Their mother passed away several years ago from cancer.

[kalm]

https://www.engadget.com/2017/12/14/fak ... dentities/

Two million identities stolen for fake net neutrality comments

As many as 2 million identities were stolen to leave fake comments in support of the FCC's decision to kill net neutrality, according to the New York Attorney General's Office. Based on the 5,000 or so complaints filed with the office, some of the victims are senior citizens, some are minors, while some are already dead. "This is a 13 year old child -- she did not post this comment, nor did anyone else in her household," a report filed by a New Yorker said. A Chicago resident who also filed a complaint called the fake comment made under their mother's name "sickening." Their mother passed away several years ago from cancer.

Awww...look! Someone discovered bots!

[HI54UNI]

Good for Washington; I hope ALL states follow that lead, although I know they won't.

I read something like 80%+ of Americans are against the death of net-neutrality, which overwhelmingly makes it one of the few items a majority of people are united about. And yet here we are.

IMO, a net-neutral internet is essential to the American economy. It's the modern version of the highway interstate system, spurring economic growth and efficiently connecting people and businesses.

The problem with a poll like that is the majority don't really know what it's all about or understand it. The term net neutraility sounds great so people are for it. If you polled those same people how many of them would agree that dihydrogen monoxide should be banned?

[Col Hogan]

Good for Washington; I hope ALL states follow that lead, although I know they won't.

I read something like 80%+ of Americans are against the death of net-neutrality, which overwhelmingly makes it one of the few items a majority of people are united about. And yet here we are.

IMO, a net-neutral internet is essential to the American economy. It's the modern version of the highway interstate system, spurring economic growth and efficiently connecting people and businesses.

The problem with a poll like that is the majority don't really know what it's all about or understand it. The term net neutraility sounds great so people are for it. If you polled those same people how many of them would agree that dihydrogen monoxide should be banned?

Or ask how many want to government controlling the internet...I’m betting there would be a much smaller number supporting it...

Net Neutrality is not neutral...it is government deciding for you...

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Plus it's not neutral now.......................

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Col Hogan]

Plus it's not neutral now.......................

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Ibanez]

What can the ISPs suck?

[ASUG8]

Good for Washington; I hope ALL states follow that lead, although I know they won't.

I read something like 80%+ of Americans are against the death of net-neutrality, which overwhelmingly makes it one of the few items a majority of people are united about. And yet here we are.

IMO, a net-neutral internet is essential to the American economy. It's the modern version of the highway interstate system, spurring economic growth and efficiently connecting people and businesses.

In other news, 93.07% of statistics are made up on the spot.

[VictorG]

Crap! My internet so so friggen slow at home right now I'm still getting last years baseball scores...........what do I have to look forward to in the future?

[VictorG]

New York attorney general will sue to stop the FCC's 'illegal rollback of net neutrality'

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/14/new-yor ... ality.html

[Grizalltheway]

What can the ISPs suck?

It

[Baldy]

New York attorney general will sue to stop the FCC's 'illegal rollback of net neutrality'

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/14/new-yor ... ality.html

The same process that gave us net neutrality is being used to take it away, so now it's illegal?

[kalm]

The problem with a poll like that is the majority don't really know what it's all about or understand it. The term net neutraility sounds great so people are for it. If you polled those same people how many of them would agree that dihydrogen monoxide should be banned?

Or ask how many want to government controlling the internet...I’m betting there would be a much smaller number supporting it...

Net Neutrality is not neutral...it is government deciding for you...

How will this proposal improve freedom and competition?

[GannonFan]

Or ask how many want to government controlling the internet...I’m betting there would be a much smaller number supporting it...

Net Neutrality is not neutral...it is government deciding for you...

How will this proposal improve freedom and competition?

How will this proposal limit freedom or competition?

I'm decidedly neutral on net-neutrality. Both sides argue the worst that could happen if the other side "wins", but in almost every case it's a prediction of what could happen and not based on any solid evidence of the probability of that thing happening. I'm waiting to see what's going to happen and then I'll decide.

[HI54UNI]

Or ask how many want to government controlling the internet...I’m betting there would be a much smaller number supporting it...

Net Neutrality is not neutral...it is government deciding for you...

How will this proposal improve freedom and competition?

I freely admit that I don't know much about it but I work with 6 utilities that provide broadband service. FWIW they all say that the current regs are very burdensome for small ISPs with no benefit to them.

The solution is probably somewhere in between where we were and where we are after today's vote. Companies like google (who has flip flopped) and fakebook being for net neutraility is not a great sign to me. And companies like Comcast being against it isn't a good sign either.

[Chizzang]

Or ask how many want to government controlling the internet...I’m betting there would be a much smaller number supporting it...

Net Neutrality is not neutral...it is government deciding for you...

No it's not ^ That's complete rubbish
It's the Government deciding for you the same way the government decides if you are allowed to have electricity
and running water

Shame on all you Conservatives who are using lazy bullsh!t responses to a very serious problem

It's very simple:
So please pay attention

Net neutrality is simple
It states that our publicly built and funded broadband infrastructure
should remain wide open for all

That it all it is...

[Baldy]

Or ask how many want to government controlling the internet...I’m betting there would be a much smaller number supporting it...

Net Neutrality is not neutral...it is government deciding for you...

No it's not ^ That's complete rubbish
It's the Government deciding for you the same way the government decides if you are allowed to have electricity
and running water

Shame on all you Conservatives who are using lazy bullsh!t responses to a very serious problem

It's very simple:
So please pay attention

Net neutrality is simple
It states that our publicly built and funded broadband infrastructure
should remain wide open for all

That it all it is...

When was the 'net ever not wide open?

[∞∞∞]

Or ask how many want to government controlling the internet...I’m betting there would be a much smaller number supporting it...

Net Neutrality is not neutral...it is government deciding for you...

No it's not ^ That's complete rubbish
It's the Government deciding for you the same way the government decides if you are allowed to have electricity
and running water

Shame on all you Conservatives who are using lazy bullsh!t responses to a very serious problem

It's very simple:
So please pay attention

Net neutrality is simple
It states that our publicly built and funded broadband infrastructure
should remain wide open for all

That it all it is...

You know what's funny, the government heavily subsidized the existing infrastructure for private companies...but the new FCC rules attempt to block states from building their own public networks (which I'm sure the states will challenge). This benefits no one except the ISPs and completely discourages economic efficiency, innovation, and healthy competition.

So much for small government and state rights.

[Col Hogan]

No it's not ^ That's complete rubbish
It's the Government deciding for you the same way the government decides if you are allowed to have electricity
and running water

Shame on all you Conservatives who are using lazy bullsh!t responses to a very serious problem

It's very simple:
So please pay attention

Net neutrality is simple
It states that our publicly built and funded broadband infrastructure
should remain wide open for all

That it all it is...

You know what's funny, the government heavily subsidized the existing infrastructure for private companies...but the new FCC rules attempt to block states from building their own public networks (which I'm sure the states will challenge). This benefits no one except the ISPs and completely discourages economic efficiency, innovation, and healthy competition.

So much for small government and state rights.

The government is out of controlling the internet less government

And I doubt you really understand states rights...

[Col Hogan]

Or ask how many want to government controlling the internet...I’m betting there would be a much smaller number supporting it...

Net Neutrality is not neutral...it is government deciding for you...

Net neutrality is simple
It states that our publicly built and funded broadband infrastructure
should remain wide open for all

That it all it is...

Last time I checked, federal $$$ paid to build the Interstate highway system...yet the feds are allowing states to charge people who want to drive faster for that right...

THERE ARE PLENTY of reasons for outrage coming out of Washington, DC, these days, but this week the divided region found a common enemy. The express lanes on Interstate 66 near DC, previously reserved for vehicles carrying two or more people, opened up to solo travelers. Except those single-occupancy vehicles have to pay a toll, one that fluctuates according to demand. The world watched, aghast, as tolling prices hit $40 for folks headed into the capital on Tuesday morning.

https://www.wired.com/story/virginia-i66-toll-road/

So, riddle me this...if it’s OK to charge people for the privilege of driving faster than all the rest of the unwashed masses on the federal highway system...why would it be wrong to do the same on the information super-highway???

And how was the internet so screwed up prior to 2015 and the implementation of the rules reversed today that mandated the implementation of the rules reversed today???

[∞∞∞]

The government is out of controlling the internet less government

Just stop...there's no government "control" of the internet. The rule is simple: it protects the public from ISPs favoring content or disabling content. And again, the public has heavily subsidized the ISPs infrastructure.

And seriously, why doesn't the FCC want states to build their own networks? What was the point of that?

[∞∞∞]

So, riddle me this...if it’s OK to charge people for the privilege of driving faster than all the rest of the unwashed masses on the federal highway system...why would it be wrong to do the same on the information super-highway???

And how was the internet so screwed up prior to 2015 and the implementation of the rules reversed today that mandated the implementation of the rules reversed today???

The roads are still owned by the public, but taxed privately. The broadband infrastructure is owned privately, but subsidized by the public...because it's SUPPOSED to be a good economic service for the nation.

There's also a VERY large difference between maintaining roads and maintaining broadband infrastructure.

And the issue arose BECAUSE the ISPs wanted to screw up something that wasn't screwed up. With the particular rise of streaming services, they decided there was a way to take advantage. With garbage like this (among others), it's no wonder this era is being panned as the Second Gilded Age.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Or ask how many want to government controlling the internet...I’m betting there would be a much smaller number supporting it...

Net Neutrality is not neutral...it is government deciding for you...

No it's not ^ That's complete rubbish
It's the Government deciding for you the same way the government decides if you are allowed to have electricity
and running water

Shame on all you Conservatives who are using lazy bullsh!t responses to a very serious problem

It's very simple:
So please pay attention

Net neutrality is simple
It states that our publicly built and funded broadband infrastructure
should remain wide open for all

That it all it is...

But it's not wide open

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk