Quantcast

Bookmark and Share
General Discussion on any topic relating to CPAP and/or Sleep Apnea.
AirPump
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:44 pm
Location: Seattle Area
Gender: Male

Re: OT - Net Neutrality

Postby AirPump on Fri Dec 01, 2017 4:18 am

Wulfman / Den
You wrote that you are afraid of Google directing a search from CPAP.com to some other outlet. That's a valid concern and that could happen whether or not Net Neutrality rules are in place because Google is not an Internet Service Provider (ISP). Google is a service that is delivered by your ISP to your computer. You don't pay Google, or Microsoft, or Facebook $50 a month to access the internet -- you pay your ISP (a utility) to keep up the infrastructure to do that. And ... there are plenty of alternatives to Google, so you can use any of those alternatives to find CPAP.com, and keep Google from making money on delivering ads to your computer. However -

Over Eighty percent of Americans have only ONE choice of provider for broadband service -- much like you probably have only ONE choice for your electricity. So if you don't like that your one choice of ISP (be it Comcast, Verizon, Frontier, CenturyLink or whatever) is charging you, or is censoring access to CPAP.com for you, your SOL. You can't vote with your dollars and sign up with another ISP if you are among the 80+ percent of Americans held hostage by the distributed monopoly that make up the telecom companies providing us access to the internet.

If indeed there was a competitive market where people like you and me could tell Comcast to piss off because they're blocking CPAP.com, or because you refuse to pay $199 a month for a package for access to the 150 websites that COMCAST has chosen for your viewing pleasure, then Net Neutrality may be less of a critical need -- because people can vote with their dollars. But that is not the reality now or in the forseeable future.

What Ajit Pai is proposing is all about making the monopoly situation with ISPs worse for consumers. Because Ajit Pai is an ex Verizon Corporate puke who never wanted Net Neutrality in the first place. That placed limits on how badly he could rip off the people in markets where Verizon had the monopoly.

What was "accepted practice" (voluntary compliance with the internet's original ethos to provide equal access to everyone) is not necessary now given that the internet has become a critical service for modern life, and the primary channel by which marketers reach the public. There's much more money at stake now, which is why Net Neutrality is more important than ever now. Google's snooping will happen whether or not you are paying Verizon $50 a month for access to everything on the web (as is today under Net Neutrality rules), or paying $120 a month for Verizon's special package of 150 chosen websites.

I don't work for Google, Facebook or Netflix. I provide services to small businesses who have the most to lose should Net Neutrality rules be scrapped by one of Trump's swamp rats who hopes to strengthen the monopoly power of a company he holds shares in. Over 22 million Americans submitted written comments to the FCC AGAINST removal of the Net Neutrality rules. But Ajit Pai probably feels compelled to remodel the galley on his yacht, so he's going to ignore what Americans want and make all of us pay dearly.

User avatar
DreamStalker
 
Posts: 7491
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:58 am
Location: Garden's Edge
Gender: None specified

Re: OT - Net Neutrality

Postby DreamStalker on Fri Dec 01, 2017 5:32 am

AirPump wrote:Wulfman / Den
You wrote that you are afraid of Google directing a search from CPAP.com to some other outlet. That's a valid concern and that could happen whether or not Net Neutrality rules are in place because Google is not an Internet Service Provider (ISP). Google is a service that is delivered by your ISP to your computer. You don't pay Google, or Microsoft, or Facebook $50 a month to access the internet -- you pay your ISP (a utility) to keep up the infrastructure to do that. And ... there are plenty of alternatives to Google, so you can use any of those alternatives to find CPAP.com, and keep Google from making money on delivering ads to your computer. However -

Over Eighty percent of Americans have only ONE choice of provider for broadband service -- much like you probably have only ONE choice for your electricity. So if you don't like that your one choice of ISP (be it Comcast, Verizon, Frontier, CenturyLink or whatever) is charging you, or is censoring access to CPAP.com for you, your SOL. You can't vote with your dollars and sign up with another ISP if you are among the 80+ percent of Americans held hostage by the distributed monopoly that make up the telecom companies providing us access to the internet.

If indeed there was a competitive market where people like you and me could tell Comcast to piss off because they're blocking CPAP.com, or because you refuse to pay $199 a month for a package for access to the 150 websites that COMCAST has chosen for your viewing pleasure, then Net Neutrality may be less of a critical need -- because people can vote with their dollars. But that is not the reality now or in the forseeable future.

What Ajit Pai is proposing is all about making the monopoly situation with ISPs worse for consumers. Because Ajit Pai is an ex Verizon Corporate puke who never wanted Net Neutrality in the first place. That placed limits on how badly he could rip off the people in markets where Verizon had the monopoly.

What was "accepted practice" (voluntary compliance with the internet's original ethos to provide equal access to everyone) is not necessary now given that the internet has become a critical service for modern life, and the primary channel by which marketers reach the public. There's much more money at stake now, which is why Net Neutrality is more important than ever now. Google's snooping will happen whether or not you are paying Verizon $50 a month for access to everything on the web (as is today under Net Neutrality rules), or paying $120 a month for Verizon's special package of 150 chosen websites.

I don't work for Google, Facebook or Netflix. I provide services to small businesses who have the most to lose should Net Neutrality rules be scrapped by one of Trump's swamp rats who hopes to strengthen the monopoly power of a company he holds shares in. Over 22 million Americans submitted written comments to the FCC AGAINST removal of the Net Neutrality rules. But Ajit Pai probably feels compelled to remodel the galley on his yacht, so he's going to ignore what Americans want and make all of us pay dearly.

Uh oh! Your whole premise is flawed from the start .... I just Googled "Internet Service Provider" :shock: :shock: :shock:

Seriously it doesn't matter because no monopoly is going to place you or I or anyone but themselves first.

AirPump wrote:I am in the web business and I can assure that the un-educated folks like Hang Fire, DreamStalker, and CeralKiller will come to regret their support of turning over control of what content gets transmitted via the web to the distributed monopolies that make up the telecoms.

I don't work for Google, Facebook or Netflix or even consider myself to be in the internet business but geeez, those who claim they do have some learning to do. :o

I was coding HTML web pages with a text editor to run on Mosaic back in the early 1990's before Netscape was even available. And by late 1990's I was writing Perl scripts to automatically write the HTML code to update web pages .... but today's so-called web "business professionals" seem so .....ummmm, so UN-EDUCATED!! :roll:
Thanks Snoredog, GoofyUT, rested gal, GoofProof, Wulfman, NightHawkeye, snoregirl and all of the others.
From 102 AHI to 0.4 AHI for over 10 yrs now :)
What's permaculture? Go here -> http://www.geofflawtononline.com/videos/

User avatar
Wulfman...
 
Posts: 5701
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 6:41 pm
Location: Nearest fishing spot
Gender: Male

Re: OT - Net Neutrality

Postby Wulfman... on Fri Dec 01, 2017 5:35 pm

AirPump wrote:Wulfman / Den
You wrote that you are afraid of Google directing a search from CPAP.com to some other outlet. That's a valid concern and that could happen whether or not Net Neutrality rules are in place because Google is not an Internet Service Provider (ISP). Google is a service that is delivered by your ISP to your computer. You don't pay Google, or Microsoft, or Facebook $50 a month to access the internet -- you pay your ISP (a utility) to keep up the infrastructure to do that. And ... there are plenty of alternatives to Google, so you can use any of those alternatives to find CPAP.com, and keep Google from making money on delivering ads to your computer. However -

Over Eighty percent of Americans have only ONE choice of provider for broadband service -- much like you probably have only ONE choice for your electricity. So if you don't like that your one choice of ISP (be it Comcast, Verizon, Frontier, CenturyLink or whatever) is charging you, or is censoring access to CPAP.com for you, your SOL. You can't vote with your dollars and sign up with another ISP if you are among the 80+ percent of Americans held hostage by the distributed monopoly that make up the telecom companies providing us access to the internet.

If indeed there was a competitive market where people like you and me could tell Comcast to piss off because they're blocking CPAP.com, or because you refuse to pay $199 a month for a package for access to the 150 websites that COMCAST has chosen for your viewing pleasure, then Net Neutrality may be less of a critical need -- because people can vote with their dollars. But that is not the reality now or in the forseeable future.

What Ajit Pai is proposing is all about making the monopoly situation with ISPs worse for consumers. Because Ajit Pai is an ex Verizon Corporate puke who never wanted Net Neutrality in the first place. That placed limits on how badly he could rip off the people in markets where Verizon had the monopoly.

What was "accepted practice" (voluntary compliance with the internet's original ethos to provide equal access to everyone) is not necessary now given that the internet has become a critical service for modern life, and the primary channel by which marketers reach the public. There's much more money at stake now, which is why Net Neutrality is more important than ever now. Google's snooping will happen whether or not you are paying Verizon $50 a month for access to everything on the web (as is today under Net Neutrality rules), or paying $120 a month for Verizon's special package of 150 chosen websites.

I don't work for Google, Facebook or Netflix. I provide services to small businesses who have the most to lose should Net Neutrality rules be scrapped by one of Trump's swamp rats who hopes to strengthen the monopoly power of a company he holds shares in. Over 22 million Americans submitted written comments to the FCC AGAINST removal of the Net Neutrality rules. But Ajit Pai probably feels compelled to remodel the galley on his yacht, so he's going to ignore what Americans want and make all of us pay dearly.


Your "arguments" are full of holes. I live in N.W. Wyoming where some things are few and far between. But, I get my Internet connection through my local phone company (I don't know if or who they contract with to get their outside connections but they service a large area here). It's a very reasonable price for the phone/Internet package and I could even get my TV through it if I wanted. But, if I chose to use another service, I very easily could. I have my cell phone service through Verizon (an old package dating back to 1995 I was grandfathered into when Verizon acquired that original cell provider). A few other options are available for cell service, too. I could switch my Internet to Verizon or some other optional providers. They're available if one wishes to use them. My satellite service has been through DirecTV for MANY years, but I could chose DISH if I wanted.
I've been connected to the Internet through my local phone company since 1998.
I have many choices out here in the sticks. I'm not changing my mind towards "net neutrality" as I believe it was already pretty "neutral" prior to the last two years. I'm adamantly opposed to the "content providers" (Google, Facebook or Netflix) calling the shots.

The problem with all of those people objecting to removing "net neutrality" is that they don't know that they're being lied to and fall for the garbage they're being fed.


Den

.
(4) REMstar Autos w/C-Flex & (6) REMstar Pro 2 CPAPs w/C-Flex - Pressure Setting = 13 cm.
"Passover" Humidification - ResMed Ultra Mirage FF - Encore Pro w/Card Reader & MyEncore software - Chiroflow pillow
User since 05/14/05

AirPump
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:44 pm
Location: Seattle Area
Gender: Male

Re: OT - Net Neutrality

Postby AirPump on Sat Dec 02, 2017 5:56 am

Wulfman - I'm happy for you that you are among the under 20 percent of Americans who have access to more than one broadband internet service provider. I live in a metropolitian area of over 2 million people and there are three monopoly providers here, but very little overlap in their territories, so any given home has but one choice, and when that one choice decides it's going to slow Netflix to a crawl, then streaming Netflix movies will be a painful experience. Comcast is my monopoly provider and they're trying to buy more content providers so they can control (translated: charge for) content while slowing down competitors like Netflix over their cable to my home. Yes, like you, I have a cell phone I can use for a monthly capped number of gigabytes of data, but that's not really an alternative to true broadband which the industry defines as over 25Mb/sec download speeds.

The reason Facebook, Netflix and Google object to removal of Net Neutrality rules is because the ISP's want to charge those very large content providers for carrying their content. (especially Netflix which consumes more bandwidth). So once Ajit Pai screws all of us with his proposal, Netflix will become considerably more expensive if one wants to maintain "full speed" on streaming their content through Comcast because Netflix will be getting charged a premium by Comcast, Verizon, Frontier, your Wyoming telco, etc. to deliver that content. Google and Netflix don't "call the shots" on your internet access any more than Facebook does. If an ISP doesn't deliver their content, the consumer doesn't get that content. In no way does a Facebook "call the shots" in how you get access to the internet. You don't write a check to Facebook each month for your internet access.

But if Ajit Pai is hoping to get away with ignoring the 22 million comments against repealing Net Neutrality that he's already received, then it really doesn't matter if you were to write him one more letter. It's going to court should Pai actually do what he's threatening to do, and the big telcos respond by jacking up prices for tiered services -- in other words, replicating everything that Americans hate about the way cable television is priced. You want Facebook? Oh, that's like the HBO add-on - only $25 per month on top of your basic internet service charges.

User avatar
Wulfman...
 
Posts: 5701
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 6:41 pm
Location: Nearest fishing spot
Gender: Male

Re: OT - Net Neutrality

Postby Wulfman... on Sat Dec 02, 2017 9:24 pm

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/11/3 ... ty-repeal/

Last sentence:

"A Comcast spokesperson also told CNET the company had “no plans” to charge websites differently for access to high-speed traffic, but the lack of a pledge to not change that in the future is sure to be cause for concern for proponents of net neutrality."


Den

.
(4) REMstar Autos w/C-Flex & (6) REMstar Pro 2 CPAPs w/C-Flex - Pressure Setting = 13 cm.
"Passover" Humidification - ResMed Ultra Mirage FF - Encore Pro w/Card Reader & MyEncore software - Chiroflow pillow
User since 05/14/05

User avatar
jtravel
 
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 11:45 am
Location: Tucson,AZ
Gender: Male

Re: OT - Net Neutrality

Postby jtravel on Sat Dec 02, 2017 11:08 pm

Net Neutrality is a good thing and should not be rescinded.
Their is only one Internet and it's the Information super highway. It should be Neutral.
I may have a choice of internet providers but what i do on the internet once I pay for the service should not be hindered or accelerated to sites that company has contracted with.
I pay for the service, a speed and or download limit and expect to be able to use that unhindered by the provider by them or any side deals they have.
It's really pretty simple.
Doing away with the Net Neutrality regulations is just handing the internet over to the big Corporations to do whats in their best intrest and not that of the paying users..

_________________
Mask Humidifier 
Additional Comments: Apap 12-18 EPR setting of 3, Using Sleepyhead

User avatar
Wulfman...
 
Posts: 5701
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 6:41 pm
Location: Nearest fishing spot
Gender: Male

Re: OT - Net Neutrality

Postby Wulfman... on Sun Dec 03, 2017 12:37 am

jtravel wrote:Net Neutrality is a good thing and should not be rescinded.
Their is only one Internet and it's the Information super highway. It should be Neutral.
I may have a choice of internet providers but what i do on the internet once I pay for the service should not be hindered or accelerated to sites that company has contracted with.
I pay for the service, a speed and or download limit and expect to be able to use that unhindered by the provider by them or any side deals they have.
It's really pretty simple.
Doing away with the Net Neutrality regulations is just handing the internet over to the big Corporations to do whats in their best intrest and not that of the paying users..


Sounds like you're contradicting yourself.


Den

.
(4) REMstar Autos w/C-Flex & (6) REMstar Pro 2 CPAPs w/C-Flex - Pressure Setting = 13 cm.
"Passover" Humidification - ResMed Ultra Mirage FF - Encore Pro w/Card Reader & MyEncore software - Chiroflow pillow
User since 05/14/05

AirPump
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:44 pm
Location: Seattle Area
Gender: Male

Re: OT - Net Neutrality

Postby AirPump on Sun Dec 03, 2017 4:02 am

Oh Goodness Wulfman. For a person who's so well informed and helpful about sleep-apnea and CPAP matters, I'm surprised to see that you would post a link to a junk opinion web site like brietbart. That's right up there with that conspiracy nutcase at infowars for the meadow muffin of the year award. There are so many places to get news and information that have at least a shred of journalistic integrity that it's hard to imagine why any real Christian would entertain supporting brietbart - a site where the Northern Idaho skin-heads hangout that is about as far from the message of the New Testament as one can get.

Back on topic however, it looks like Net Neutrality will be headed to the courts and become one more issue in upcoming elections if Pai actually ignores the will of the people and hands the internet in this country to the telcos. As you've already correctly observed, there is big money behind preserving the internet as a neutral Title II utility for everyone, and not turning it into a windfall profit playground for a small number of Corporate monopoly interests who provide considerable dark money to campaigns. When there's no competition for internet service in over three-quarters of the country's markets, nothing good will come of this because there is no free-market to permit users to dump their ISP.

User avatar
zoocrewphoto
 
Posts: 3069
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:34 pm
Location: Seatac, WA
Gender: Female

Re: OT - Net Neutrality

Postby zoocrewphoto on Sun Dec 03, 2017 4:53 am

AirPump wrote:When there's no competition for internet service in over three-quarters of the country's markets, nothing good will come of this because there is no free-market to permit users to dump their ISP.


Where is the percentage coming from? What data is it based on?

I did some looking as it find it strange that people would only one have option for internet service. I found a report that had it broken down by speed, and your numbers only worked for the super high speed option. For lower speeds, 63% and 75% had 3+ options and 90+% had at least 2 options.

Also, a lot of people get internet through their phone in addition to their computer internet service, often a different company. I can use my phone as a hotspot for wifi if I need to, even though I have wifi via comcast in the house.

I'm not arguing either side of this law as I really don't understand what changed 2 years ago or what would be affected now. Just trying to understand how it could be true that most people don't have multiple options for internet service.

_________________
Mask: Quattro™ FX Full Face CPAP Mask with Headgear
Humidifier: S9™ Series H5i™ Heated Humidifier with Climate Control
Additional Comments: pressure range 11-17, also using Oracle mask
Who would have thought it would be this challenging to sleep and breathe at the same time?

User avatar
jnk...
 
Posts: 836
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2014 12:36 pm
Location: By a lake in da woods
Gender: Male

Re: OT - Net Neutrality

Postby jnk... on Sun Dec 03, 2017 9:16 am

This helped me, because I am a dummy:

Proponents of Net Neutrality include . . . companies like Microsoft, eBay, Amazon, Twitter. . . . Opponents of Net Neutrality include tech giants such as Cisco, IBM, Juniper, Ericsson, etc.--"Net Neutrality for Dummies,"
by Desislava Stankova, Jan 5, 2016, http://elaw.guide/net-neutrality-for-dummies/


So as I read it, no matter which side one is on, one is siding with large corporations.

Is it possible, then, to be neutral about neutrality?
-jeff, a user, not a pro.

'Attack the message if you want to; just don't attack the messenger.'--Pugsy.

amenite
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2015 7:02 pm
Gender: None specified

Re: OT - Net Neutrality

Postby amenite on Sun Dec 03, 2017 10:38 am

Why not take a pause from the debate to see if your identity was hijacked and used to post fake comments to the FCC web site about this issue? The Attorney General of New York is providing this handy tool to query the FCC comments ...

https://ag.ny.gov/fakecomments

You'll find some valuable insights on the public's attitude toward this issue, like this gem of a comment right here:

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/11302486904890

User avatar
DreamStalker
 
Posts: 7491
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:58 am
Location: Garden's Edge
Gender: None specified

Re: OT - Net Neutrality

Postby DreamStalker on Sun Dec 03, 2017 11:36 am

AirPump wrote:Oh Goodness Wulfman. For a person who's so well informed and helpful about sleep-apnea and CPAP matters, I'm surprised to see that you would post a link to a junk opinion web site like brietbart. That's right up there with that conspiracy nutcase at infowars for the meadow muffin of the year award. There are so many places to get news and information that have at least a shred of journalistic integrity that it's hard to imagine why any real Christian would entertain supporting brietbart - a site where the Northern Idaho skin-heads hangout that is about as far from the message of the New Testament as one can get.

Back on topic however, it looks like Net Neutrality will be headed to the courts and become one more issue in upcoming elections if Pai actually ignores the will of the people and hands the internet in this country to the telcos. As you've already correctly observed, there is big money behind preserving the internet as a neutral Title II utility for everyone, and not turning it into a windfall profit playground for a small number of Corporate monopoly interests who provide considerable dark money to campaigns. When there's no competition for internet service in over three-quarters of the country's markets, nothing good will come of this because there is no free-market to permit users to dump their ISP.


He wants net neutrality .... except for those he defines as conspiracy nutcases, skin-heads, non_Christians, or just simply those he doesn't like. :shock: :shock: :shock:

Not only is he UN-EDUCATED, he's a HYPOCRITE! :lol: :lol: :lol:
Thanks Snoredog, GoofyUT, rested gal, GoofProof, Wulfman, NightHawkeye, snoregirl and all of the others.
From 102 AHI to 0.4 AHI for over 10 yrs now :)
What's permaculture? Go here -> http://www.geofflawtononline.com/videos/

User avatar
Grace~~~
 
Posts: 347
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 3:27 pm
Location: Florida
Gender: Female

Re: OT - Net Neutrality

Postby Grace~~~ on Sun Dec 03, 2017 11:48 am

amenite wrote:Why not take a pause from the debate to see if your identity was hijacked and used to post fake comments to the FCC web site about this issue? The Attorney General of New York is providing this handy tool to query the FCC comments ...

https://ag.ny.gov/fakecomments

You'll find some valuable insights on the public's attitude toward this issue, like this gem of a comment right here:

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/11302486904890






This is what I found when searching for my name?

That seems like a lot of filings?
Doesn't it?

I do not have that unusual of a name though ~~~
So maybe it's just a very opinionated chick with my same name?



Date Name Created
4/26/17
Total Filings
23,138,510
Filings in last 30 days
926,151
Began XPAP May 2016. Autoset Pressure min. 8 / max 15. Ramp off. ERP set at 2. No humidity. Sleepyhead software installed and being looked at daily, though only beginning to understand the data.

SewTired
 
Posts: 1385
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 8:33 am
Location: Minneapolis area
Gender: Female

Re: OT - Net Neutrality

Postby SewTired on Sun Dec 03, 2017 11:55 am

zoocrewphoto wrote:I'm not arguing either side of this law as I really don't understand what changed 2 years ago or what would be affected now. Just trying to understand how it could be true that most people don't have multiple options for internet service.


I live 15 minutes from Minneapolis and I have ONE CHOICE for internet. I go a couple of blocks away to the next city and I have two choices. My sister in rural MN has no choices - she has to go with Hughes satellite which extremely limits what she can do (250 mg per day). WHY? Because the provider who has been given the monopoly for her area refuses to lay the wire needed for internet. It is not available through her phone service. In my home town in Massachusetts, which is just outside the Boston metro complex, they have ONE choice for internet and many can't get Hughes because they lack southern exposure or are in apartments. Nothing through the phone. So it isn't just rural folks who have limits of choice. Many in cities also have limits.

I do not claim to understand all the issues with Net Neutrality, but I do understand greed and monopolies only benefit those who have the control.
Diabetes 2, RLS & bradycardia
Settings: range 8-12

amenite
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2015 7:02 pm
Gender: None specified

Re: OT - Net Neutrality

Postby amenite on Sun Dec 03, 2017 12:50 pm

Grace~~~ wrote:...
This is what I found when searching for my name?

That seems like a lot of filings?
Doesn't it?

I do not have that unusual of a name though ~~~
So maybe it's just a very opinionated chick with my same name?



Date Name Created
4/26/17
Total Filings
23,138,510
Filings in last 30 days
926,151

You're missing something, there should be a page or frame with a sub-set of results. Those are the counts for all filings for Docket 17-108.

PreviousNext

Return to CPAP and Sleep Apnea (CLICK HERE TO READ POSTS)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Goofproof, TD7410 and 36 guests