U.S. on the verge of trashing net neutrality. Will this impact the net in Thailand?

[Jingthing]

I'm asking because I don't know.

 

If anyone can shed light on this, please do.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-15/killing-net-neutrality-rules-is-said-readied-for-december-vote
 

Quote

 

FCC Plans December Vote to Kill Net Neutrality Rules

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission next month is planning a vote to kill Obama-era rules demanding fair treatment of web traffic and may decide to vacate the regulations altogether, according to people familiar with the plans.

The move would reignite a years-long debate that has seen Republicans and broadband providers seeking to eliminate the rules, while Democrats and technology companies support them. The regulations passed in 2015 bar broadband providers such as AT&T Inc. and Comcast Corp. from interfering with web traffic sent by Google, Facebook Inc.and others

 

.

 

Edited November 21, 2017 by Jingthing

[Langsuan Man]

7 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Obama-era rules

That's all you need to know as far as the WHY 

 

Only impact in Thailand would be the monkey see, monkey do, syndrome so Thai ISP's might get the same idea to charge for speedy access to media. 

 

Although it could impact those here who legally stream from the US, like accessing Netflix,   for instance 

[Oxx]

This is what a country with no net neutrality looks like (Portugal):

 

 

Can't see it happening here any time soon, though.

Edited November 22, 2017 by Oxx

[Jeffrey346]

I disagree with the attempt to limit bandwidth in the US.. Thailand has been cutting back for years. Especially internationally.

 

If you pay for 100MBs down are you getting it on a consistent basis? I think NOT..

[soalbundy]

What doesn't Trump trash ?

[Curmudgeon1]

10 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

What doesn't Trump trash ?

You mean fix?

[Jingthing]

Look, I didn't intend to start a political thread.

This change is happening under the trump administration. That is a fact.

It's also a fact that the international structure of the internet is under some U.S. influence (how much, I don't know) and most of it's most important global web players (google, FB, twitter, etc.) are American companies.

So I was sincerely curious if there is likely to be an international impact from this.

That there will be a domestic U.S. impact is a given. 

Edited November 22, 2017 by Jingthing

[suzannegoh]

It's only theoretical that net neutrality laws in the US do anything at all, as they were enacted to solve a problem that might happen rather than one that already had.

[AlQaholic]

3 hours ago, Jeffrey346 said:

I disagree with the attempt to limit bandwidth in the US.. Thailand has been cutting back for years. Especially internationally.

 

If you pay for 100MBs down are you getting it on a consistent basis? I think NOT..

Yup, Thai Internet providers have been doing it for many years. They favor big customers such as companies, give them higher bandwidth, while private users speed is strangled as soon as they connect somewhere outside of Thailand. Do a speed test inside Thailand and then a speed test to for example anywhere in the US, My speed is 30MB/s inside Thailand consistently and around 5 MB/s if I connect to the US.

[suzannegoh]

Yup, Thai Internet providers have been doing it for many years. They favor big customers such as companies, give them higher bandwidth, while private users speed is strangled as soon as they connect somewhere outside of Thailand. Do a speed test inside Thailand and then a speed test to for example anywhere in the US, My speed is 30MB/s inside Thailand consistently and around 5 MB/s if I connect to the US.

 

That problem has largely been mitigated by more competition in the marketplace and more installed bandwidth. Check out AIS Fibre sometime, it flies and if your ISP is playing games all you need to do is switch to them.

 

[scottiejohn]

32 minutes ago, suzannegoh said:

 

That problem has largely been mitigated by more competition in the marketplace and more installed bandwidth. Check out AIS Fibre sometime, it flies and if your ISP is playing games all you need to do is switch to them.

 

What has that response got to do with the OP.

[suzannegoh]

What has that response got to do with the OP.

 The OP asked if I net neutrality regs would affect Thailand. I think that the answer is no because if one ISP is traffic shaping or otherwise hindering your Internet connection you can switch to another ISP who won't. Also, as installed bandwidth increases ISPs have less incentive to play games with your bandwidth.

 

 

 

 

 

[muratremix]

5 hours ago, Curmudgeon1 said:

You mean fix?

If you love trump so much why don't you go back to the states?

Majority of the rest of the world doesn't like trump, not because of his looks but because of his actions and agenda of destroying the planet earth.

 

Trump is the planet-killer!

[Grumpy Duck]

9 hours ago, Curmudgeon1 said:

You mean fix?

No, he was accurate. The con artist in chief has not fixed one thing? Well not one thing for worker class Americans.  Has not kept one campaign promise. 

[suzannegoh]

On 11/21/2017 at 8:51 PM, Oxx said:

This is what a country with no net neutrality looks like (Portugal):

 

 

Can't see it happening here any time soon, though.

How does that work?   The EU has net-neutrality rules, so apparently whatever ISPs in Portugal are doing isn't preventable solely by passing Net Neutrality laws.

 

 

Edited November 23, 2017 by suzannegoh

[Pib]

Most of the big telecommunications companies do "not" want net neutrality as it limits them from charging for various services and types of data flow.   Big business loves the Trump Administration because of the many regulations his administration is killing off or changing to be coporate friendly vs consumer friendly.  Many of these regulations which protected the consumer from certain business practices but many voters just don't get it. 

 

[AlQaholic]

16 hours ago, suzannegoh said:

 

That problem has largely been mitigated by more competition in the marketplace and more installed bandwidth. Check out AIS Fibre sometime, it flies and if your ISP is playing games all you need to do is switch to them.

 

Yeah, I have heard AIS is pretty fair in this respect. I am using True and they are the one playing the games. But all you need to do is call them regularly to complain about the speed and they will upgrade you. It's a pain but we have little options as all members of our family have their phone numbers tied into the same package as our fiber thingie.

[suzannegoh]

On 11/23/2017 at 9:21 AM, Pib said:

Most of the big telecommunications companies do "not" want net neutrality as it limits them from charging for various services and types of data flow.   Big business loves the Trump Administration because of the many regulations his administration is killing off or changing to be coporate friendly vs consumer friendly.  Many of these regulations which protected the consumer from certain business practices but many voters just don't get it. 

 

 

Some of the big players who enthusiastically supported Net Neutrality in the US included Google, Yahoo, Amazon, and Netflix.  And Comcast has at least played along with it. 
http://corporate.comcast.com/openinternet/open-net-neutrality

[Oxx]

13 minutes ago, suzannegoh said:

On 23/11/2017 at 9:21 AM, Pib said:

Most of the big telecommunications companies do "not" want net neutrality 

Some of the big players who enthusiastically supported Net Neutrality in the US included Google, Yahoo, Amazon, and Netflix.

 

Not sure what your point is.  None of the companies you mentioned is a telecommunications company - they are all primarily content providers, so of course they're in favour of net neutrality.

[suzannegoh]

20 minutes ago, Oxx said:

 

Not sure what your point is.  None of the companies you mentioned is a telecommunications company - they are all primarily content providers, so of course they're in favour of net neutrality.

Comcast is the largest ISP in the US and if you look through their blog on the subject you will see that they are unambiguous about their continued support for Net Neutrality laws and of the FCC's authority to decide which pricing models and business practices are acceptable.  It's because being regulated as AT&T once was reinforces their monopoly rather than weakening it.
http://corporate.comcast.com/comcast-voices?category=open-internet

Edited November 24, 2017 by suzannegoh

[Oxx]

12 minutes ago, suzannegoh said:

Comcast is the largest ISP in the US 

 

They are also the second-largest multichannel video service provider in the US by total subscribers.  Their content provision is why they support net neutrality.

[suzannegoh]

8 minutes ago, Oxx said:

 

They are also the second-largest multichannel video service provider in the US by total subscribers.  Their content provision is why they support net neutrality.

Aside from prohibiting predatory practices, which might be bad for the big guys, Net Neutrality laws benefit the largest ISPs because it also locks out competitors who might have a more nimble business model.  For instance, if someone wants to sell you an internet package that gives you 20MB/sec downloads for streaming video but only 5 MB/s for everything else, that would be illegal under Net Neutrality laws but it might allow a smaller competitor with less bandwidth available to them to get a foothold in the market.

Edited November 24, 2017 by suzannegoh

[suzannegoh]

I guess that what I'm wondering is that if Google, Yahoo, Amazon, Netflix, and Comcast all support continuation of the current Net Neutrality laws, who are the big monopolists that the Trump administration is catering to by repealing Net Neutrality?

 

 

[suzannegoh]

On 11/22/2017 at 8:51 AM, Oxx said:

This is what a country with no net neutrality looks like (Portugal):

 

 

Can't see it happening here any time soon, though.

This seems an example of “zero rating”, where an ISP provides unlimited access to certain services for free, not unlike when a telephone company allows you to call certain numbers for free.   Whether that’s in violation of the EU’s Net Neutrality rules (which Portugal is required to follow) is unclear to me, but also unclear to me is how it causes harm to consumers.
https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/22/16691506/portugal-meo-internet-packages-net-neutrality-ajit-pai-plan

Edited November 24, 2017 by suzannegoh

[Pib]

4 hours ago, suzannegoh said:

Some of the big players who enthusiastically supported Net Neutrality in the US included Google, Yahoo, Amazon, and Netflix.  And Comcast has at least played along with it. 
http://corporate.comcast.com/openinternet/open-net-neutrality

 

Cut and Paste from above link. 

 

Quote

 

Comcast is committed to an Open Internet.

 

• We do not block, slow down or discriminate against lawful content.

• We believe in full transparency in our customer policies.

• We are for sustainable and legally enforceable net neutrality protections for our customers.

 

Comcast's statement is just saying what the "current" FCC rules require in not slowing/blocking/charging extra for certain content. And of course all companies will always say they believe in providing full transparency of their customer policies.   And net neutrality protections (in accordance with rules/laws) for customers...whoops, the FCC just loosened up the net neutrality rules/protections which does give us some leeway in what we can data shape and charge for "in accordance with the revised FCC rules on net neutrality."   We will update our transparent customer policies to reflect such.   Company double talk.

 

And what some of these companies are saying in public may be different than what they are whispering in the ears of the FCC/Trump Administration. 

 

I just feel in my gut the proposed rules will result in higher corporate profits due to higher consumer prices.

 

 

[suzannegoh]

On 11/24/2017 at 4:17 PM, Pib said:

 

Cut and Paste from above link. 

 

 

Comcast's statement is just saying what the "current" FCC rules require in not slowing/blocking/charging extra for certain content. And of course all companies will always say they believe in providing full transparency of their customer policies.   And net neutrality protections (in accordance with rules/laws) for customers...whoops, the FCC just loosened up the net neutrality rules/protections which does give us some leeway in what we can data shape and charge for "in accordance with the revised FCC rules on net neutrality."   We will update our transparent customer policies to reflect such.   Company double talk.

 

And what some of these companies are saying in public may be different than what they are whispering in the ears of the FCC/Trump Administration. 

 

I just feel in my gut the proposed rules will result in higher corporate profits due to higher consumer prices.

 

 

One of the many things that I’m not grasping about this “Net Neutrality” debate is that if blocking, throttling, and unfair prioritization of traffic is the problem that needs to be solved, why not just use a VPN?  That seems like a much more direct solution than having the FCC micromanage the ISP’s network policies. 

If you're using a VPN, then it wouldn't matter if your ISP says that they are going to charge extra to connect to Facebook or Netflix.  While most of the 80 percent of Americans who opposed the repeal of Net Neutrality might not know what a VPN is, they'll find out pretty quickly if it turns out that using one would save money on your cable bill. 

Edited December 20, 2017 by suzannegoh

[Langsuan Man]

1 hour ago, suzannegoh said:

While most of the 80 percent of Americans who opposed the repeal of Net Neutrality might not know what a VPN is, they'll find out pretty quickly if it turns out that using one would save money on your cable bill. 

Really,  all a VPN does is anonymize what you are viewing on the Internet, has absolutely nothing to do what is being offered on the Internet and by whom.  Not to mention that every VPN slows down your access since using a VPN adds another layer to your access

[mtls2005]

It's probably too early to tell what the impacts might be in the U.S., and what the impacts might be in Thailand.

 

In the U.S. many consumers are limited to one single ISP option, and one single 'broadcast' option, but content can be streamed over the internet and via satellite.

 

In Thailand it seems like there are more ISP options, but limited content options (other than streamed)?

 

Very generally speaking, in the U.S. I'd expect some content providers, who are not also ISPs (like NetFlix)  will have to increase prices to cover their additional costs to pay for ISP access/bandwidth/priority. ISPs will probably start to offer more "tiered" options re: QoS, bandwidth, performance and even capped consumption.

 

The continued mergers of ISPs and content providers will probably blur the affects on the consumer. But it's safe to say that some consumers will have to pay more than they do today to maintain the type of service they have today. Maybe Blockbuster will make a comeback?

 

No clue how Thailand might be impacted, either for those who access services from the U.S, or natively?

Edited December 20, 2017 by mtls2005

[suzannegoh]

48 minutes ago, Langsuan Man said:

Really,  all a VPN does is anonymize what you are viewing on the Internet, has absolutely nothing to do what is being offered on the Internet and by whom.  Not to mention that every VPN slows down your access since using a VPN adds another layer to your access

But that's exactly what you need.  A VPN anonymizes and encrypts so that no one other than your VPN adminstrator can tell what websites you are connecting to or what the nature of the traffic is.  That would deprive your ISP of the ability to charge you extra for visiting particular websites and from blocking or throttling certain types of services.  Isn't that stated goal of Net Neutrality laws? 

And yes, generally there will be a speed hit with a VPN but there's a long running thread in this forum in which users have documented particular cases where using a VPN actually increases speeds from Thailand to the US.  Given how fast my connection is from Thailand to the US while using PIA VPN, I'd be suprsied if there was a huge speed hit when used entirely within the US.

Edited December 20, 2017 by suzannegoh

[Langsuan Man]

7 minutes ago, suzannegoh said:

That would deprive your ISP of the ability to charge you extra for visiting particular websites and from blocking or throttling certain types of services.  Isn't that stated goal of Net Neutrality laws? 

They are not worried about blocking or throttling you, they are concerned with the blocking or throttling at the ISP level certain content that has not "paid" to be in the fast lane

 

The ISP's  don't care if you are slowed down watching Netflix for instance, they just want to be able to charge Netflix more for making it available in their fast lane.  If Netflix or any other content provider refuses to pay extra then how you access them, VPN or not, makes no difference