USA Net Neutrality poll: what will you pay to play EU?

How much will you pay your ISP to access EU before deciding to quit this game?

  • $2.00

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • $4.00

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • $5.00

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • $10.00

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • $15.00

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • $20.00

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    20
  • Poll closed .

Tournament Spon

Guardian
Joined
Jan 31, 2006
Posts
330
Location
US
Society
freelancer
Avatar Name
Rick TheVictor Hypercharged
Net neutrality will be gone and isps will start charging us to access content previously not able to charge for In the event we must pay to access content from MA I am curious what will you pay per month for your game before quitting EU?
 
Net neutrality will be gone and isps will start charging us to access content previously not able to charge for In the event we must pay to access content from MA I am curious what will you pay per month for your game before quitting EU?

Kind of a moot point right now. The repeal still has to get through Congress first.
 
Net neutrality will be gone and isps will start charging us to access content previously not able to charge for In the event we must pay to access content from MA I am curious what will you pay per month for your game before quitting EU?

They didn't charge before 'net neutrality', why would they charge after it?
 
They didn't charge before 'net neutrality', why would they charge after it?

net-neutrality-what-you-need-know-now-infographic.png
 

They may want all the riches of the world but what they can actually get has limits. Once again - why didn't they charge extra prior to 'net neutrality'?

If anything, repeal of 'net neutrality' will result in you being able to get 'internet without netflix' cheaper than you pay now. (Consider by analogy cable TV: applying the same rule to it would mean you'd only have one option - 'all the channels' - and that wouldn't be cheap.)
 
Not going to even vote on this as I wont even entertain the thought of this happening...

@Haruto... just because they didn't do anything before is not an indicator of how they will behave in the future..thats a very very dangerous assumption imo.. particularly as the internet of things continues to grow and more and more $$ is at stake....

Net neutrality closed a potential abuse loophole, and now they have opened it right back up again...

The biggest problem with all of this is almost everyone in America has no choice whatsoever on their ISP. They are essentially like utilities here, 1 option per region for cable and telephone .... SMDH
 
@Haruto... just because they didn't do anything before is not an indicator of how they will behave in the future.

Indeed, the whole fact that someone went out of their way to restore the previously undemanded opportunity means it's getting very demanded presently. ISPs might insist that nothing is going to change but they merely wait for the dust to settle, so the people let their steam off onto someone else.
 
The biggest problem with all of this is almost everyone in America has no choice whatsoever on their ISP. They are essentially like utilities here, 1 option per region for cable and telephone .... SMDH

This is true. Most regions are monopolized. Most of the providers (if not all) attempted to limit specific content at least once during the last two years but they were forced to desist by the FCC's enforcement of NN. Now that this new revenue stream of pay to display has been given the stamp of approval, they will undoubtedly do it.
 
The biggest problem with all of this is almost everyone in America has no choice whatsoever on their ISP. They are essentially like utilities here, 1 option per region for cable and telephone .... SMDH

I've lived in several cities across different regions in the US over the last few years, and I've always had multiple options for ISPs. Granted, more rural areas will suffer from this just as they do with cell service. But most large population centers have several options (I believe there are 3 in my current area).

This whole doomsday view of the repeal is such an overblown rhetoric. Free market competition will force service providers to maintain fair packages and pricing, just like with cell services. Even 5 years ago, there were really only three cellular options that were worth using (ATT, Sprint, Verizon) and they were still expensive and capped data. Now you've got a dozen options which have forced the big providers to offer bundles and lower prices while also offering uncapped data.

Obviously, cellular and internet service providers aren't going to operate the exact same way - but forced transparency on cellular providers yielded positive results for consumers. The FTC will do the same with ISPs, forcing transparency on all services.

There are also a lot of assumptions that ISPs will block access to certain apps and services, such as Netflix or Hulu, while only providing there "preferred" option (ie: block Netflix and only allow Hulu). I don't see this being the case. Again, looking at recent changes to cellular providers: T-Mobile now offers free data access to Netflix while still having users spend data for other services like Hulu. If anything, we will see competition among ISPs providing bonuses to consumers as opposed to punishing them with certain applications.

I could be wrong, and I'm obviously drawing conclusions from another similar sector. But I do think the anti-repeal rhetoric is more of a political ploy and media frenzy than it is realistic. We will see.
 
Time to dig out the ol free to air sattelite receiver if they start charging too much
 
There are also a lot of assumptions that ISPs will block access to certain apps and services, such as Netflix or Hulu, while only providing there "preferred" option (ie: block Netflix and only allow Hulu). I don't see this being the case. Again, looking at recent changes to cellular providers: T-Mobile now offers free data access to Netflix while still having users spend data for other services like Hulu.

That's not exactly how it works. T-mobile allows customers to opt for unlimited streaming of selected websites but the video is forced into low quality, I think 480p. Since customers can opt in or out at any time, the FCC allowed this, unlike other providers' proposals, which did not give customers the same ability to choose. Anyway, those who are hoping the providers will offer internet without certain services for cheaper are dreaming. These are the companies which raise the customer's bill by tacking on random meaningless charges every few months... they keep notes on you and if you don't call the retention department at least 3 times every month threatening to take your business elsewhere, they keep adding fake charges. And they seem to double the charges if the customer is over 65. This is their business model, I kid you not. I currently have monthly charges for 2 modem leases that I cannot get removed, despite explaining to customer service that I only have 1 modem and I OWN IT! This year I had a co-worker who allowed their provider to slowly raise the charge from about $50 all the way up to $170 over the course of a year, for what couldn't have been more than 10 mb/s internet... because they were not technically savvy and did not want to go back to their previous provider because they had left that one after being similarly treated. They were eventually conned into getting satellite from the same company, because it would be "cheaper" but the rep forgot to mention that expensive service calls would be required every few weeks until they "got it right". And this is not even rural America. Maybe they'll completely change their predatory business model... just maybe. :laugh:
 
I don't really think too many people are taking the doomsday rhetoric angle, and I apologize if I came off that way...

I do feel a lot of people are uneasy with this seemingly unnecessary and unasked for change...

Rave, you mention free market... this is the exact opposite of that... also you mention the cell industry, sure its much better now but for how long was the population price gouged?.... similar thing happened with long distance phone call rates earlier than that... and stock brokers and and....

We are now in a situation where we can only "hope" all these huge companies play fair ... I think we all know how that usually plays out.

The current administration has a detest for all regulations. Regulations are rules generally designed to protect industry competitiveness, the environment and human rights. Regulations are put in place for reasons.
 
I've lived in several cities across different regions in the US over the last few years, and I've always had multiple options for ISPs. Granted, more rural areas will suffer from this just as they do with cell service. But most large population centers have several options (I believe there are 3 in my current area).

This whole doomsday view of the repeal is such an overblown rhetoric. Free market competition will force service providers to maintain fair packages and pricing, just like with cell services. Even 5 years ago, there were really only three cellular options that were worth using (ATT, Sprint, Verizon) and they were still expensive and capped data. Now you've got a dozen options which have forced the big providers to offer bundles and lower prices while also offering uncapped data.

Obviously, cellular and internet service providers aren't going to operate the exact same way - but forced transparency on cellular providers yielded positive results for consumers. The FTC will do the same with ISPs, forcing transparency on all services.

There are also a lot of assumptions that ISPs will block access to certain apps and services, such as Netflix or Hulu, while only providing there "preferred" option (ie: block Netflix and only allow Hulu). I don't see this being the case. Again, looking at recent changes to cellular providers: T-Mobile now offers free data access to Netflix while still having users spend data for other services like Hulu. If anything, we will see competition among ISPs providing bonuses to consumers as opposed to punishing them with certain applications.

I could be wrong, and I'm obviously drawing conclusions from another similar sector. But I do think the anti-repeal rhetoric is more of a political ploy and media frenzy than it is realistic. We will see.

Oh hello customer, it looks like you're trying to view news related websites! Well, we can offer you CNN for 5$ or FOX NEWS for 5$! Oh, you don't want to access these "unbiased" "reputable" "news" sources? Well we do offer access to Reuters for 1000$...
 
MMO games use fuck all for bandwidth, one day it may happen but they will take a chunk out of services like YouTube, HBO, Netflix, Amazon Video, Music streaming services, and Torrent traffic.

Most ISP's also provide TV, Movies, and Music, They have lost a great deal of revenue from peoples adoption of online Streaming services and piracy, now they want that back.

For now I think Gamers in the US are okay.
 
Sounds like incoming censorship.

Some old Nazi/Gestapo ppl would be proud on what the US (among others) is achieving!

old post, I see it now, it's still valid today :p
 
I think net neutrality is worldwide norm and was voted with majority in last few years in countries like USA, Europe or India and ISP charging money to access small websites and giving highway to companies like Yahoo is not going to happen anytime.
 
Back
Top