Gadgetory

hey guys how's it going - welcome to Paul's hardware today's video is definitely a different type of video because I'm gonna be talking all day today well all for the next maybe 10 or 20 minutes about net neutrality net neutrality is something that's I feel very strongly about and it's something that not everyone is completely familiar with there's some important stuff going on in the US government right now with regards to net neutrality and how internet service providers can treat the data that you get at home through your internet connection whether that's provided through a larger net service provider like Comcast or Verizon or Time Warner spectrum or whether you have a small Internet service provider or whether you're lucky enough to have Google Fiber but I'm joined today by none other than Wendell from level one techs how's it going Wendell how are you thanks for having me I'm doing great thank you so much for being here I brought Wendell in because he's very smart he knows a lot about this subject and although there are of course areas where both of us are not completely familiar we have done a ton of research to give you guys a lot of feedback on this topic to hopefully give you guys a quick rundown of how it's actually going to work and then we're also going to do a follow-up video to this one on my channel Paul's Hardware we're gonna post links in the video description to the level 1 text video where Wendell and I are gonna take a lot more time to go into more depth about a lot of these topics talk about some specific scenarios and that kind of thing so if you're not familiar with net neutrality or if you know someone who isn't familiar and you want to share some information with them that you feel is good hopefully that's what we're going to be bringing you right now but let's start off from the very basics and what is net neutrality from the starts from my understanding you have a connection to the internet again provided by your internet service provider and packets of data go to and fro on that you might be connecting to a server that's across the town across your state across the country or around the world that's the basis of the world wide web you can go out on the internet you can browse the public internet and you can access it you can load it up on your computer you can interact with it however you want net neutrality is the basic premise that's the packets of data being sent to and from your computer are treated equally regardless of where they might originate from elsewhere on the Internet's that is currently upheld by what is called title 2 that allows the FCC to enforce net neutrality so let's do a follow up question and what is title 2 and Wendell maybe you can chime in here about this one and give a quick rundown of what title 2 is title 2 is a section of the 96th Telecommunications Act which is sort of the amendment and replacement of the 1934 Telecommunications Act that talks about what are called common carriers you know the Institute is a thing about it in sort of technological terms but common carrier thinking about like like riding the bus or getting from point A to point B a common carrier is it's gonna shuttle your data from A to B it doesn't really care what the data is it doesn't really care about anything like that telephone that's like I'm gonna pick up the phone and I'm gonna call you know Bob three states over it's gonna be a long-distance call the companies there's more than one company involved with that obviously and the companies that are carrying that phone call can be said to be common carriers they don't need to be concerned with the content you know if you and Bob are planning a bank robbery or whatever the content of your call just doesn't concern the company they're a common carrier they're absolved in legal liability there they're just carrying the communication and so ISPs are now classified as you know sort of title 2 communications providers meaning that they provide the infrastructure necessary for communications and they don't interfere with or concern themselves with the contents of that communication now our stance based on our discussion leading up to this video is that net neutrality is a good thing and if you look at it from sort of just the basic idea of what it actually is and as Wendell is described just now your data going to and fro the or the data of the website you're trying to access should just be since one from one point to the other and of course bounce through the Internet's to get where it's going to go the enforcement of net neutrality or the ability for a government agency to say to your internet service provider hey you need to treat the data in this way is currently upheld by the fact that we have title to classification of Internet service providers as common carriers now there are other ways potentially that net neutrality could be enforced and the the best theoretical alternative is simply via competition so that idea is that well you could have net neutrality if you have a bunch of different different internet service providers if one internet service provider says hey I'm going to give you access to the entire internet for this base price that's what you get you'll probably be pretty happy with that if you have another another internet service provider who says here's your cost for your Internet's and then hey if you want to access Netflix we're going to charge you an extra 10 bucks if you want to access this website we're going to charge you an extra fee for that if you want to access services for apps or that kind of thing they might add it a net additional fee for that that isn't allowed with the current titles new classification but it could potentially be allowed if Internet service providers were not classified as common carriers under title 2 if they move them to title 1 for example which is how they were classified briefly and again in our lengthy or follow up video to this we're going to go into a bit more of the history of that but our stance is that net neutrality is good however it's enforced but the way the Internet is currently deployed in the United States right now is such that most people actually don't have competition so in the absence of being able to enforce net neutrality through natural competition and choice between Internet service providers one which might treat your data the way you want to one which might throttle it or slow it down when you're accessing different web sites data I think unnecessarily complicates things in most people's minds think about like the water company or the power company and it's like I there needs to be three competing power companies in my area to provide electricity so that we get the best most capitalistic way of doing that it's like no I don't I don't think that makes logical sense three competing power companies would probably all have inferior infrastructure to one properly want run power company in an area supplying electricity to that area it's kind of the same way with the local network infrastructure but not necessarily the internet connection itself and so this this is kind of thing is called a natural monopoly and so like your telecommunication stuff there kind of is a natural monopoly to provide that and think about like your Abell TV provider in the telephone company like what historically were two different services both bringing a copper line to your house now you can do the same cuz everything is digital you can do the same kind of thing over either connection so you've already got a little bit of redundancy in your in your infrastructure if you're fortunate enough to be in an area with two different providers but most of these companies have conglomerated to the point that there's not really a lot of overlap in in competition in in a given geographical area so in the absence of competition our stance is that title two is the proper way to enforce net neutrality right now the FCC however currently has what is called a notice of proposed rulemaking going on they're calling it restoring Internet freedom and they're going to be voting on it on December 14th and about well about a week and a half basically the expectation is that the FCC is going to vote along party lines Republicans versus Democrat we don't like to phrase this as a political issue however that's how it's falling out right now unfortunately there might be people who lean left or right when it comes to the political spectrum who might get an idea of how they feel about this based on their political leanings rather than the facts but that's why we're trying to bring you guys more facts today we're going to do this with a little bit of structure and that's I happen to follow a few of the members of the FCC on Twitter Brendan Carr tweeted this out just last week and he posted a piece intended to debunk what he calls the babble of other misinformation this is actually posted directly to the FCC website all the articles that were talking about today by the way are linked in this video's description so check them out there this is a list of the net neutrality myths according to the FCC and his response and what He is calling facts that counter each of those myths we're gonna go down this list point four points and we're gonna show you why we feel you're very much being misled by this document in particular and why we feel like the FCC's actions they're about to take are misguided and that they should probably do things a little bit differently it's so hard not to wax poetic a great link but we're gonna keep it short for you guys that's the goal I don't know I don't know how long this intro has been so far but let's let's let's plow through a most start off with the first one the general myth this is the end of the Internet as we know it's and of course there's been lots of discussion online because lots of people like the internet so people are rightfully upset and angry that the internet might change or especially that they might somehow need to pay more for the Internet that's really what it boils down to a lot of it how much the internet costs and how much people are gonna have to pay for it now the statement made here is that the internet was free and open before the Obama administration's 2015 heavy-handed Title 2 internet regulations a phrase that's repeated often and very often they can't seem to to list these as title 2 regulations without referring it to its full title the Obama administration's 2015 heavy-handed title to Internet regulations but that language aside first off if you look at what the Internet service providers are trying to do they've indicated in the past that they're somewhat excited for net neutrality rules to go away and in fact when it comes to court proceedings they've specifically stated that they're intending to do segmentation and to favor some perverts preferred services content or sites over others not only that but there's the potential introduction of legislation to prohibit States from enforcing net neutrality so if you're a states rights kind of person they didn't like the feds coming in and telling you what to do but you do like net neutrality they might be going in and telling your state that by the way we have decided that net neutrality shouldn't be a thing therefore you cannot decide that as a state either which doesn't seem necessarily right to me yes right yeah I don't know there's also a lot of history going on here and again there's been several court cases regarding this where internet service providers have had to go in and had to make statements in court which when you make a statement in court you kind of have to tell the truth otherwise it's kind of a big deal so there are some additional documentation zamora links about prior to 2014 when real when Tom wheeler the previous FCC Chairman reclassified title one to title to the article on the verge specifically talks about the death of the internet how the FCC lost net neutrality and could kill the internet but Wendell did you did you have something to comment on about this one that was that The Verge articles actually before wheeler reclassified them and so it's it's kind it's almost a little bit of foreshadowing because it talks about how all this wasn't you know classified right this doesn't have the thing and that and that kind of makes sense you have to understand that before they were title to they really were title one they that is not the every great lie has a little has a little bit of truth in it and this is the same thing in this guy's response and so he's just saying well you know it did really well under title one but the whole reason the wheeler felt that he had to reclassify the Taiwan to title two it was because of specific cases of shenanigans that we're gonna talk about but you also say in the the 2013 case where the FCC and Verizon were having an argument over exactly this not being free and open and treating things equal that the actual quote says I'm authorized to state for my client today but for but for these rules we would be exploring those types of arrangements meaning the whole you know the destination pays which is not a good thing so the judge asked very directly do you plan to treat certain Internet traffic differently from others and their answer was yes absolutely we have these plans and were these rules not in effect that's what they intend to do so the statement that the internet isn't going to change is definitely not correct in that regard if you want a little bit more check out this Free Press article on the brief history of net neutrality violations starting out in 2005 leading up to 2007 2010 all the way up to 2012 and even beyond some stuff that happened past that but the brief history if you're looking at the past eight years or so in 2013 and 2014 was when this really became kind of more of a big deal a lot of that had to do with the increase in popularity and Netflix also the increase in ban with usage by Netflix and the decision by a lot of Internet service providers to then throttle them that led to a lot of debates in 2013 and 2014 it led to some attempted legal actions by the FCC that were opposed by Internet service providers which then led to the FCC deciding alright we're gonna make you title 2 and that will allow us to enforce a net neutrality net neutrality has been a thing and has been enforced under title 2 since 2015 we're living in a world with net neutrality enforced by the FCC they're trying to change that and take that away so the risk of running just a bit long it's also important to understand that the before like from so 96 1996 allowed these mergers to take place and in almost every case when the FCC allowed a merger or reviewed a murderer you can look at the memos going back you know 2005 2000 when these different companies were merging like when GTE merged I think with GTE and Bell Atlantic merged that that became Verizon who's at issue here and in the memo for those types of mergers a lot of time the SEC would say look we we don't want you to do any kind of this stuff that you're trying to pull with the FaceTime and the Google Wallet and like 18 the--with FaceTime and Verizon with Google Wallet which we'll talk more about later we don't want you to do anti net neutrality stuff in these memos for the mergers and in general these companies agreed with those memos and it's like alright we'll let you merge but remember you got to be good citizens and then they started being bad citizens and if wheeler had had enough of it so there is an obvious sort of leading up to the action that was taken in 2015 and it seems to us that a lot of the arguments being made by the Internet service providers right now of saying like look we don't need rules to enforce this just make it on the honor system we'll hat will disclose to people what we're doing and that and just leave it at that there's plenty of evidence and again more of this on the video over on level-1 texts plenty of evidence to show how internet service providers have not been doing that in the least bit and there's no indication of why they would sudden somehow change in 2017 now as compared to what they were doing leading up to 2015 alright let's move on to item number two though on this list the myth is startups will not be able to compete with title to regulations the myth according to the FCC and their fact is that entrepreneurs starting new businesses online thrived long before title 2 regulations and will continue to flourish with more opportunities to innovate companies like Google Facebook Netflix and Twitter all started and experienced tremendous - tremendous growth under previous like light touch rules and that is true to an extent but I think you have to take into consideration the context of the Internet's being somewhat in its infancy stages or at least its toddler stages in the late 90s and early 2000s also the fact that as Wendell has already stated this it's it hasn't exactly been the same regulatory framework going back prior to 2015 how this fails to explain how title 2 is in any way cumbersome for startups and entrepreneurs that's ten cell Section C C and that's how deceptive language can be deceptive I sort of just read it and took it as fact that like oh well yeah but that's definitely worth it pointing out that there's no counters that's really being presented here explain to me again how sheep's bladders may be employed to prevent earthquakes who are you who are so wise in the ways of science alright one more thing to add to that is that if you look at these thriving entrepreneurial internet-based businesses such as Netflix for example as they have grown and gotten larger some of their opinions when it comes to regulations have sort of changed for example the Netflix CEO Netflix was a champion of net neutrality and we're using them as an example for many of the points for making today but as they've gotten gotten bigger and as they have become an incumbent provider as compared to I don't know what blockbuster who counts before that but they've changed their stance on net neutrality many times and now that they are in a position where they're gonna benefit from net neutrality not being a thing anymore because they are so entrenched in the existing marketplace they're not necessarily opposed to net neutrality rolling back of course they keep going back and forth on this because there's a lot of public opinion as well and that can sway how they behave but just goes to show that I don't think the arguments of all of the existing large internet companies doing well is one that says oh yeah it was just fine how it was so let's go back to how it was I mean if anything if you really want to take this apart you could say that Google Facebook and Netflix have the ability to pay off companies under paddle one as they have said that they want because you know the specific again we'll talk more about it later but the FaceTime thing where AT&T was blocking FaceTime unless you paid more but that seems like not something an entrepreneur could deal with but whereas Apple could yes so obviously the ability of someone to start a brand-new company out of nothing is one of the great wonders of the Internet's and if there is the capability of an internet service provider to block and throttle traffic then there's definitely the chance of large incumbent providers of whatever it might be whether it's a retailer or a media service or something like that blocking out smaller companies and not giving them a foothold to even get started moving on to number three say they their claim that the myth is that Internet service providers will block you from visiting websites you want to visits they say that the Internet service providers didn't block websites before these regulations and they won't after you well they didn't block websites before they blocked a protocol who was bid for it there yeah well big BitTorrent and and also web sites they don't like which text messages it was text messages to from a political group and Verizon was like no we're not having this oh yeah so I mean this is the other thing like the this this also crosses over and bleeds into not just like well I want my data and my internet access because I like to go there and watch movies and whatever like we're talking about the potential for influencing the actual like news and information that people get if you have someone who feels strongly politically one way or another who is behind one of these large companies you might potentially they might be able to influence what you see and block to you from seeing stuff that they disagree with and that's a big deal but also just the fact that they've done it before very obviously which directly counters what he just said here is a chart from 2013 and 2014 showing Netflix speeds this is just the most well known example but go back to that list of net neutrality violations that we started off with and there's other examples in there too the idea that this hasn't happened before is simply false number 4 though investment has flourished under the current regulatory framework they're saying is a myth they're saying that following this regulation in 2015 broadband investment has fallen for two years in a row and it's the first time that that has happened in the internet era so first reputation of that is an ARS technica article the FCC chair as you pie has been accused of ignoring investment data specifically pushing the narrative that there's been no investments in broadband infrastructure now there's a huge ohmygosh huge issue when it comes to investment in broadband infrastructure and we're gonna be diving into that on Wendell's video and oh my gosh it's crazy like all of this stuff all of this discussion all of the arguments we're having right now I feel like has this this big old elephant in the room underneath it all which is that we were all supposed to have really good fiber by now yeah but but we'll get to that ignoring that completely which we shouldn't been ignoring that looking at broadband investment over the past 7 years at least from 2010 to 2016 shows that it's it fluctuates it actually goes up and down sometimes there's more investment sometimes there's less investment the vagaries have not been taken into account by a GTA and in fact there are cycles of investment within this framework 2011 to 2012 there was an 18.9 percent growth 2012 to 2013 10.1% growth and then while still under light-touch regulatory framework 2013 to 2015 investment declined so stating broadly that investment has declined since 2015 is again simply false I'll also point out that Google like him or hate him gosh darn it they've been trying to invest in broadband deployment but they've just been they've been having a real hard time getting that fiber on those balls yeah it seems seems like they should be having an easier time with that everywhere I've heard about Google going and deploying Google Fiber has been very positive but they're they're having some challenges when it kind of always trying those approvals push through the courts I guess yeah yeah I mean it's like you're having to fight lawsuits tooth and nail and it's like no this isn't legit and no stop doing this and though this is our monopoly and it's like well you know this wouldn't be a problem if you had reasonable Internet in this area to begin with yeah so and again everyone should have that more on windows and windows video let's move on to point number five though you won't be charged premium to access any part of the public Internet if this passes this is this is my paraphrasing of what they're saying broadband providers will not charge you a premium if you want to reach a certain online content the fact is that they are free to charge you a premium for specific websites and web services if they want if the current plan goes through and net neutrality strict rules are revoked but they don't necessarily even have to do that if they don't want to there's other ways of getting more money out of your internet connection without even charging you more directly for example back when Netflix did the slowdown and Comcast forced them to pay money so it doesn't necessarily need to come from you as the end user they can attempt to charge the actual originators of the data that you are getting in this example Netflix actually paid Comcast and that's what resulted in suddenly their Netflix speeds to their customers going up or you know just reclassify stuff it seems like a protection racket doesn't it's like oh I don't feel a lot of packets you got there'd be a shame if something happened to them that would that would suck I mean you never know where there's those packets might disappear - maybe Ajit Meyers gonna try to convince this that we can apply RICO laws in that case when something happens to all your packets that it's some kind of like criminal criminal cartel that's abducting your packets or something where do all the lost packets end up there probably stockpiling them and that's nice it's my theory what has lost packets yes this these the other option that they can do if they don't want to just charge where the data is coming from is they can zero rate data and zero rating is where they have a specific set of media content they might deliver to you that isn't charged against your internet service plan so the data rates don't apply in those cases now on the face of it zero rating actually seems like a pretty appealing thing to a consumer because it's like oh I can watch all these movies for free but it is leading down the path towards darkness because zero rating actually effectively causes the rest of the contents to cost more money maybe not necessarily in some configurations of a t-mobile has had a system that was actually okay by the FCC back during 2015 and 2016 but zero rating that was saying those wireless providers were specifically exempted from the title two stuff which I thought was pretty interesting there we go and then wireless providers were including weird thing there and they were included in 2015 they woman they there were there were some rules that they had to follow but largely they were excluded because of the limited aggregate total global bandwidth of that medium the last mile bandwidth or whatever so it's kind of complicated but in general I would say that it's not it's like it's bad when your ISP and the content provider can get together for competition because imagine you know Netflix does zero rating for example with t-mobile imagine a competing service like Netflix that pops up they wouldn't necessarily be in a position to negotiate those zero rating fees with with the provider they may not they may need it able to get the time of day and so does that mean that they're gonna have to go with like a third-party CD end deliver that content or does that mean I mean that just seems like that's setting up infrastructure to locking in incumbents which two incumbents working together historically is you know generally a thing that actually happens so we had that if you go far enough down that path you end up with say you know if you have four major internet service providers in the in the country and they're all tied to media companies then you would basically sign up for the internet service provider and their media and then if you want access to any of the other stuff maybe you have to pay more for the cross access to the other network obviously that's sort of a worst case scenario but that is sort of the negative side of zero reading I suppose but let's move on to item number six current regulations hurt competition between ISPs and to deter small Internet service provider startups and this actually of all of the items on this list I found to have the most sort of partial sheen of truth to it because as we've already discussed in today's video there are limitations to title two classifications there are additional regulations and it does make it more difficult for say a start-up ISP to get started I think this one we're gonna cover a lot more in the other video because if you want to open that Pandora's box let's talk about why those ISPs are classified as information services rather than common carriers in the first place and that was because in the ninety-six telecommunications act these ISPs agreed to open up their local infrastructure for all and so they in order to bring you what they called video dog home services they wanted to say hey we want to separate the local network company from the data services that run on it so when you get a fiber optic connection to your building your house your outhouse your garage your you know whatever that it's just a local data connection you're not actually connected to the Internet and then when you sign up with worldcom or you know Bell Atlantic or whoever died actually get you on the internet or this information service or this video service with these TV channels and this other video service with these other TV channels and it is kind of I mean they were kind of describing Netflix and Hulu and all that kind of stuff and so I think that that if the local loop were unbundled and you could sign up with multiple data providers and it all ran over the same network then there probably would be some truth to this but I think if you're gonna say this you can't ignore the other thing and the fact is that if you look at the United States there's something like 50 million homes that do not have a broadband entry and do not have more than one option for a broadband internet connection and that's a that's a pretty big deal cuz again the natural competition that would lead to the enforcement of net neutrality just simply doesn't exist for about half of Americans now the the way that this is being dealt with which is a really really kinda stupid way Michele people know you do have choice you do have competition is actually lowering broadband standards or lowering the standard for what is classified as broadband we moved up to 25 megabits per second from I think 4 megabits per second and I forget when that was that was something like 5 or 6 years ago I believe they want to lower it lower it back from 25 back to 10 which is just the step in the in the wrong direction we want faster Internet's we want more bandwidth not the other way around the other thing that they're potentially doing is telling you that if you have a wireless connection for a cell phone that that counts like as long as you've got enough data bandwidth on your wireless connection then that's your broadband internet connection but these obviously aren't viable solutions especially if they ever mind that Bobcat yeah especially for anyone trying to run a business but yet rolling back standards so suddenly telling you you have more more competition than you actually do for an actual wired broadband connection very very very disingenuous very misleading and I'm just gonna I'm just gonna slip in there that in 1996 broadband the broadband promise for 2005 was 45 megabit symmetrical upload end down there's a lot of people out there that would kill for 45 upload but when we're supposed to have that window 2,000 5,000 512 years ago let and there's a deployment supposed to be like nationwide right like a very high Universal yeah so it's like you've got a utility outhouse where you're well pump is where it's pumping your well water and running it to your house yeah that's gonna have a fiber optic connection every structure in America 45 megabit my god all right so we need I'm gonna try to really plow through the rest of these so we can get to more on that on Wendell's side because we have yet to to record that bit yet but let's let's talk about some of these other ones number seven is that fast lanes well the myth is that this will result in fast lanes and slow lanes that's what a lot of people talk about and your data will go into a slow lane unless you pay more money that is the general fear but this actual response that they did here doesn't say that that's not actually going to happen they didn't even really respond to that this results in fast lanes and slow lanes on the internet and worse and customers experience they didn't they say it will lead to better faster and cheaper broadband for consumers and startups but that doesn't say there will be no fast lanes in slow lanes what's what's what's really exciting here is the the we part and we already covered this is that the terms like fast and slow those are relative terms yeah it's like up 25 is too fast let's redefine fast you know just reclassified but change the meaning of the word so we don't have an article to link you guys to respond to this because it doesn't even seem like they're attempting to to tell you that that's not going to be a thing but yeah maybe have some expectations that there will be fast lanes and slow lanes if this actually happens there is a Portugal internet meme bouncing around the internet I'll be honest I actually brought this up in one of our live shows the meme itself isn't necessarily it you can't directly apply it to the current net neutrality argument but there's an article on the verge that deals with this a little bit more basically Portugal is part of the EU and EU actually does have some pretty good net neutrality rules but what this does refer to is the ability in this package to pay a little bit more money to get some effectively 0 rated additional data so if you use a lot of social or you use a lot of email or use a lot of music you can pay an extra 5 euro a month to give yourself an additional cap that goes only towards that specific thing that you paid for this is a segment essentially sort of a strange means of 0 rating it's sort of in that same family but since it was brought up on the list we thought we would at least dress address it briefly and there is an article that you guys can check out on that one next up the myth is 10 regulations are good for innovation and the facts presented is that these regulations are in fact not good for innovation and they list a single instance of one major Internet service provider that put on holds its plans to build out of home Wi-Fi network because of uncertainty surrounding the rules I feel like given that there are other links in this article that have some backups or whatever they might come up with more than one example or at least give us something to go on based on that anyway I feel like that one's a little nebulous so we'll move on the next one is reversing Title 2 regulations will comprise consumers online privacy and privacy of course is a big deal for a lot of people who want to maintain online privacy but this one there's actually a CNN article about this was back in April and this was one of the actions of the current FCC right that's so if they're trying to tell us that our our privacy will be better then why are their current actions already enabling our browser history to be sold by our Internet service providers to advertisers so I think that the quickest fix for this is for somebody to get a hold of some important person's browsing history and you know what kinds of terrible sites they go to and it'll be taken care of the example I always like to cite is the VHS remember remember remember tapes like video tapes ok some some reporter got ahold of some Congress critters VHS rental records and you can imagine like how much pornography that the Congress crater rented and so immediately in federal law we have the you know protecting of the video Records Act it became it became a high priority very quickly in that instance so yeah some sort of misuse of that with regards to someone in Congress I think probably might be the best option for helping them preserve our online privacy but also how sad is it that your VHS rental records have more protections under the law then you put your browsing history you know I mean you can't you can't you can't point out these we at level one we've considered making a MedicAlert bracelet and selling it on our store that says delete my browsing history that'd be a good one that aura just have it tattooed across your chest along with do-not-resuscitate all right the next one I was a little confused about repealing title t regulations will make it harder for disadvantaged Americans to get online this isn't something that I've heard argued very much so I don't have a direct response to it but apparently this might be an issue honestly we're talking about the cost of the Internet's and we're also talking about how much investment internet service providers have made in the internet for Americans again according to the agreements that they have made with the federal government that seems like the best option to get people cheap Internet rather than providing Internet service providers with a means of charging people more money that just seems seems like a kind of it they're lobby for ways to subsidize this because I think Verizon has the thing where you can opt into their super privacy inviting thing and they'll give you a few bucks off your your monthly plan oh yeah it just tracks everything you do yes your Mike's maybe won't win they didn't come right out and say that so I feel like that they probably responded that way for this one but that sort of been in conflict with the one talking about privacy huh yeah it kind of is yeah you've you can choose you have your options you can either have privacy or you can have money but you cannot have both all right there's three more items on the list first one here is fed of tea see they're gonna handle it don't worry about it we'll just give all the internet regulation responsibilities to the to the FTC rather than the FCC where you go into this on Windows video because there's some legalities involved and it bares a little bit more explanation and we've already gone way longer and my short video than we intended to the final one on the list is that you can't abandon quote approved title two rules without a change in circumstances and specifically refers to the Supreme Court now this is just a little frustrating again going all the way back to what the FCC is doing right now with their intent to create laws that will prevent for instance states from creating neutrality rules obviously the Supreme Court has weighed in already on the decisions that have been made with regards to net neutrality but this is just one of those legal arguments I believe like oh the court approved the courts already approved it so you can't change it that is not the case right now but the final one here and this one we all will talk a little bit about is the the commentary process the FCC actually introduced the notice of proposed rulemaking back in May they had a commentary you can go online and go to the FCC website and post the comments on it there were 22 more than 22 million comments filed their response by the FTC FCC to the comments is very strange because on the one hand it seems like they're saying hey we opened up these comments so the public can comment and let us know what they feel on the other hand the commenting process is not an opinion poll and for good reason and the Chairman's plan is based on facts and law rather than quantity of comments so go ahead and comment so we can know how you feel and then completely ignore what your comments actually say because we're worried about the law rather than the quantity of comments there were some statements made about this regarding like oh we're gonna take only gonna take your comment seriously if you have like some legal framework going on in there something like that but regardless of all that the comments themselves have been grossly compromised according to just about anyone that you talk to about it in fact there's a Pew Internet article here that has a bunch of screenshots of it's going through and you can just see from there they pulled data directly using the FCC's internet portal and for instance thousands of submissions feature duplicate names 16 17 thousands comments the name was just net neutrality 7,400 was just the internet there's also a breakup of the different different all the different comments and whatnot but essentially there's a ton of repeat comments there are a ton of times when a bunch of comments were submitted all at the same time there was an API that was set up that they believe was being taken advantage of in order to submit bulk duplic comments there was accusations that there was a DDoS attack on the FCC right after there was a bunch of promotion about this going on and that suddenly the people couldn't submit comments and there's a lot of mystery surrounding what went on with that my favorite part was the alphabetical names like the names are showing up in alphabetical order as if so we got all these hundred thousand people together and it's like Aaron a something yes your turn alright so there's obviously obviously 22 million comments we're not all submitted by your average American who wanted to go in there and let the FCC know what their thoughts were on net neutrality now Brandon Carr is common here in his publication specifically singles out Pro title to net neutrality comments that were submitted multiple times like very specifically seven point eight there 7.5 million submitted with the same sentence in association with only 50 thousand unique names and addresses if you read this your impression is that all of the falsely submitted comments were for net neutrality not true not true in the slightest in fact the best sort of breakdown that I've seen of it looks at all of those comments removes anything that's duplicate and yes we know that probably removes Pro and anti net neutrality comments and just looks at the remainder if you if you take that all out there's only about 2% I believe that our actual unique comments and of that 2% 98.5 percent of the original comments are in favor of net neutrality or alternatively phrased oppose killing net neutrality and there's a tech there article on on that there so it seems like if you look directly at the comments that are unique and in my opinion if you're getting that many false comments these are the ones that you should probably trust that it does seem like most people in fact the vast majority people are in favor of net neutrality and are in favor of it being enforced the way it currently is enforced alternatively maybe some of the people who are calling for the FCC to take a closer look at this before they go ahead and vote on December 15th maybe we should do that maybe we should wait that's the other option because there's obviously some shenanigans going on with all that and I I certainly would like to know more about it before they go ahead and vote this thing through I'm all for a democratic process it does make sense to me that you wouldn't want the unwashed masses dictating everything but I think that there's a there's a different take a different approach that a jeep I could take on this which is to just look at the transgressions that led from the original title 1 to title 2 reclassification and what led from the 1934 Telecommunications Act to the 1996 Telecommunications Act and say you know what AT&T and Comcast and some of these other companies they were doing something that isn't right and it is actually anti-competitive and we are going to do this and this when we roll them back to title 1 to make sure this doesn't happen I think that they would probably be better off to just do more forbearance when win wheeler enacted title to there was about 700 things that he said that these don't apply and that's that's a mechanism called forbearance and so I think a Jeep I could do that her title to he's like hey you know what we found that these other things in title 2 they're too restrictive for these companies and they've got some really good idea for business and commerce we're gonna add these to the list of things under title 2 that companies don't need to follow and I think that just just even some inkling that he's considering that would probably go a long way from the PR aspect but I just I haven't seen any of that in any of the press release or any of the material or any kind of hint that anybody is actually trying to do a reasonable and intelligent analysis of the situation it seems like weighing both sides of the arguments in the arguments we're seeing for what they're doing what they're planning to do would yeah it would relieve a lot of people's concerns over what's going on it would at least make you feel like hey this is an agency that's supposed to be there to help Americans it's supposed to be there to provide people with equal access to regulate communications in such a way that's the company that control those the the the infrastructure and the connection can't take advantage of people and it doesn't seem like the actions that they're going forward with are doing that or are even taking into account that hey here is what would be best for people it seems like all of the arguments are basically taking what the internet service providers have been saying will be best for them and sort of pacing it over and saying look here's how why we're doing this and we're gonna do it regardless of what you tell us but anyway this video has been much longer than was anticipated I'll be honest I anticipate it was gonna go long anyway we're gonna do another one I'm windle's Channel so we're gonna do that right now I want to post a link to that in this video's description guys thank you so much for watching this video and sticking with us with us the entire way I know this is a sort of a weighty dense issue and really appreciate you taking the time to give it your full thought and consideration and of course if you guys want to post some comments in the comment section down below you are welcome to do that hit the thumbs up button too if you enjoyed this video I'll be back with more con sense that's a little bit more tech related and not so much net neutrality related very soon Wendell thank you again so much for being here today and for participate in install video collaboration thank you for having me it's been amazing of course links to Windows channel down there to go subscribe level one techs they do great work thanks for watching again guys we'll see you next time