How does Net Nutrality affect SE/XIV?

Well I don't know, thought you guys would?
Here what I know.
FCC has voted to revoke Net Nutrality, 3/2
Yes is looking bad....
The next fight is on Court....
Basically we losing until Court decided what to do.

With how it looks in other countries, most likely you'll pay for basic internet connection. (what you pay now)
Then you pay to be allowed to access sites based on content.

Example:

All music related stuff, like itunes store, pandora
All Video related stuff, like youtube, twitch
All Social Media stuff, facebook, twitter
All "call" related stuff, like skype
All video game access, MMO etc

Which is either $2~ a day, or something like $30~ a month for 1 of these categories, and if u want them all, a small discount of $130 on top of your normal internet cost.

Then if you want a video to actually load. (if you have AT&T right now, you'll see how impossible it is to watch a youtube video in 240p, as it takes nearly 20 mins to load 5mins) you'll need to pay for your current speed, by another $10 most likely, or more.

But, thats based on other countries, and what little I remember. I might have the numbers wrong, and I'm too lazy to look them up again.

Doubt it will. Rules will go to how they were before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cakekizyy

Doubt it will. Rules will go to how they were before.

---

Why would they beg so badly, to have the rules removed, to just do nothing different? Despite being caught attempting to break the laws repeatedly?
(Plus they were already working on these things back then anyways)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cakekizyy

Doubt it will. Rules will go to how they were before.

---

People don't change rules just to not test their limits.

Don't be this naive.

Well depends on area and type of services. Seems most are targeted towards online streaming videos and such. Over all when people are paying for data their will probably won't notice most of the change. People who have unlimited data may be impacted the most. Worst case throttling may become the biggest issue. I'm in the west coast and certain companies are now giving disclosures in their advertisement that service will slow down based on usage.

Plus most of the changes happened more recently in other countries.
It wont "go back to the good ol days".

Personally internet should be either treated like phone services, or postal services. (Currently being treated like the phone services, which is what started NN)
And I more so think both the phone and internet should be more like the postal services, where you can choose between the governments regulated version, or a business version.

The government can adjust to demand, and the business can decide if they want to try and compete.

It's all fair then.
(The only exception is that the government literally isnt allowed to step in and make any laws towards the businesses if this is the system we go with, to prevent a reverse problem from occurring.)
Right now the system is just a monopoly with how they work together, so there is almost no competition for them, except in a small percentage of places.

At the moment? It won't. All the vote did was push that they are going to change the rules. The rules have not instantly changed after the vote, it's gonna be a while before anything is done and most likely Pai and the FCC will be taken to court over how they handled this whole thing and the vote will most likely get reversed. If you would like a rather informative article that explains "what happens next?" then I recommend this one by TechCrunch. They go over a lot of what is gonna go down over the next few months and what to expect.

https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/14/th...mobilenavtrend

But do not give up and become complacent! The fight isn't over. Continue to speak up and make your voice heard on this issue!

Ashit Pie, this is your fault.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReclusiveMage

Ashit Pie, this is your fault.

---

Technically it's Trumps/Obama's fault for putting him onto the FCC, and then making him Chairman.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReclusiveMage

Ashit Pie, this is your fault.

---

Is that his actual name? No wonder he's mad at the world, smh...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lokier

Is that his actual name? No wonder he's mad at the world, smh...

---

no, it's Ajit Pai.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LastFireAce

[...]

---

Nothing is going to happen with the repealed regulations at the moment. There are several steps that have to be done first, including going to court.

Assuming that those regulations are successfully removed, I see nothing happening to FF14.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Claire_Pendragon

[…]

---

I keep seeing these examples of pricing tiers and packages, and there is no context applied at all.

• What is the infrastructure like in these countries?
• Are the ISPs government owned or heavily regulated by the government?
• How many ISPs within the country? Do those ISPs compete? Can the ISPs share their traffic over other ISPs method of transportation (lines, towers, etc.)?
• What are the regulatory rules for data within those countries (example: are you allowed to have unlimited data or are you capped)?

As someone who is a shill for the ISP, and works for one of them, I can state that context is important to when stating these tiers and packages. Some of the countries that have these types of plans have them because of government regulations and/or infrastructure. For example, when dealing with countries like China, who have per-byte type plans, the infrastructure within the country is still poor compared to the USA. There is also the fact that the Chinese government owns the utilities there.

I can see an ISP try to pull what you are stating within the USA, and get reamed for it. Ever since we could have access here to the internet here in the USA, you just paid for bandwidth. I can’t see this being changed unless an ISP wanted to commit suicide.

You can trust me *puts on jack boots* that nothing is going to *puts on riot gear* affect your *puts on obvious Nazi metaphorical patches onto company uniform* gaming experience on *grabs paper containing addresses of all customers* FF14 *leaves to take everyone’s first-born child/cats*.

I'd have to say that it doesn't affect XIV/SE itself as much as it affects your internet service provider.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Claire_Pendragon

Why would they beg so badly, to have the rules removed, to just do nothing different? Despite being caught attempting to break the laws repeatedly?
(Plus they were already working on these things back then anyways)

---

Because it had Obama's name on it

For SE/ffxiv, it doesn't mean anything. Many companies pull their product out of US market literally in decades but doesn't mean they don't keep producing new games or content. Would you expect the world to stop eating because you can't watch <insert-your-favorite-tron> ?

I’m really not sure what a visit to court would or could do, TBH.

These are the guys who get to write the rules. That means, they’re allowed to change them, whether someone else likes the changes or not. A ruling that they cannot change the rules could then be used to point out that if they lack that power, then the FCC had no power to put them in in the first place, resulting in no NN laws anyway. That’s speaking logically, anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Claire_Pendragon

With how it looks in other countries, most likely you'll pay for basic internet connection. (what you pay now)
Then you pay to be allowed to access sites based on content.

---

Other countries have actual broadband competition, so what happens there isn't what will happen in the US. Only about a third of households in the US have access to more than 2 ISPs that offer 10mpbs. Laws are in place to stifle competition, so the ISP will do whatever they want, and your options are limited.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roth_Trailfinder

I’m really not sure what a visit to court would or could do, TBH.

These are the guys who get to write the rules. That means, they’re allowed to change them, whether someone else likes the changes or not. A ruling that they cannot change the rules could then be used to point out that if they lack that power, then the FCC had no power to put them in in the first place, resulting in no NN laws anyway. That’s speaking logically, anyway.

---

Individual states are suing because the FCC has said that the federal government does not have the right to regulate ISPs, but has ALSO said that it is not something that a state may regulate, either.

This is blatantly unconstitutional, because all powers not explicitly granted to the government are reserved for the states (10th Amendment.)

So either the FCC is wrong about the federal government having no authority to regulate ISPs, or they are wrong about states having no authority to regulate ISPs. The authority has to rest in at least one of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReclusiveMage

Ashit Pie, this is your fault.

---

NICE!

R.I.P.

You thought you complained about bad ping before, just wait until you need to spend $50 a month just for access to gaming content, then another $100 to use it at the "fast" speeds (read: Current speed). On top of your existing internet bill cost.

If things go like they were before the end user ISPs will start giving their own services preferential treatment and shakedown their content competition to get equal treatment. It is why the previous FCC board reclassified ISPs as common carriers. To be honest that would not have happened had Verizon not taken the FCC to court for less strenuous rules to limit an ISPs ability to treat their on content better than their competitors and won. The result really ticked off the other big end user ISPs at Verizon.

Personally I think it needs to be treated as a common carrier just as the phones are. We also need to get the cable company sponsored bills in many states that do not allow local governments to build their own systems reversed. These laws were introduced as a few municipalities have create their own fiber based services for citizens at lower subscription rates and higher speeds than the local cable company. The fact is the current end user ISPs in the US do not want to compete nor invest in their systems and want to keep their poorly run network monopoly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catwho

Individual states are suing because the FCC has said that the federal government does not have the right to regulate ISPs, but has ALSO said that it is not something that a state may regulate, either.

This is blatantly unconstitutional, because all powers not explicitly granted to the government are reserved for the states (10th Amendment.)

So either the FCC is wrong about the federal government having no authority to regulate ISPs, or they are wrong about states having no authority to regulate ISPs. The authority has to rest in at least one of them.

---

Unfortunately, precedent suggests it will be with the Federal, not a State, government. The 10th Amendment is ignored in so many cases, it is effectively treated as non-existent and meaningless. Don’t get me wrong - I think that it should be applied far more often than it is (which is easy enough, if it was applied ONCE it would be applied more often than it is). But things like Obamacare (impossible to do with the 10th Amendment, though Massachusetts’ Romneycare was perfectly legit) and the blatant misuse of the Interstate Commerce clause indicate that its not going to be up to the States.

Some places are suing to take power from the federal government (cities and states do not have the constitutional authority to rewrite American immigration policy, yet cities sued to stop any kind of Federal defunding for their Sanctuary City policies) and in many cases the Federal government has blatantly usurped power that belongs to the States, or to no Government at all (the saving of General Motors comes to mind here). In all of these, I see the 10th Amendment being blatantly ignored and trampled upon.

We never should have ratified the Amendment that gave individuals direct voting rights for their Senators. That was a tipping point against States Rights (though it was not the starting point against States Rights).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Urthdigger

You thought you complained about bad ping before, just wait until you need to spend $50 a month just for access to gaming content, then another $100 to use it at the "fast" speeds (read: Current speed). On top of your existing internet bill cost.

---

Do you really believe that you’re getting the best Internet speeds right now?

Or is it more likely that companies are already throttling everyone equally and considerably, to save on operating costs?

Allowing an “Internet Lexus lane” where you pay more for a faster than what we currently get now speed would not be a bad thing, depending upon the increases in speed and price.

This never should have happened. There are many people on both sides who don't want this. Though, it's not over yet. This issue is years away from being resolved. It's going to go to court as people are already talking about suing the FCC and it will likely end up in the Supreme Court as a result. Then of course our Congress could always get off their collective asses and actually do something to help us out by taking up the issue themselves. Not likely to happen with the current people in office, but you never know.

Your ISP already gives you options of "speeds" to pay for as is. why would they suddenly offer an even FASTER option for more after NN is removed? (It's going to be the same speed, but at a higher price)

This game company charges extra for inventory space they themselves are keeping intentionally limited. And people pay it. If ISPs can do the same with bandwidth I bet they will.

Short answer: it won't affect XIV/SE at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Claire_Pendragon

Why would they beg

---

Pro-tip: They didn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roth_Trailfinder

Do you really believe that you’re getting the best Internet speeds right now?

Or is it more likely that companies are already throttling everyone equally and considerably, to save on operating costs?

---

You do realise that is the point of Net Neutrality, right? That even if a ISP is throttling the connection, they are doing it to everyone, as all internet traffic is to be considered equal.

• Without it, they're free to block sites with content/views the ISP doesnt agree with
• Without it they're allowed to throttle or block your connection just because you want to acess, lets say a competitor to the ISP's own streaming service.
• Without it they're allowed to throttle specific sites just because they dont happen to be on a paid for "fast lane"
• And without it they're allowed to throttle your connection unless you pay for that same "fast lane" (i.e current speed). And just imagine the potential for money grabbing here for a second, because if you think it's just gonna be "a extra $50 and you're done" then you're deluding yourself. Same with the "slow lane" if you really think it's gonna be anything but a damn near unusably slow and bumpy connection

And if we're gonna go there to begin with and argue that ISP's are already running with slower connections then they should, who's to say that you'll even get acceptable speed to begin with if you pay for the "fast lane"

No matter what way you spin it, over all, this is a terrible thing for consumers, as you're being forced to fork over at this point god knows how much more money, plus could have specific sites outright blocked from you, no matter what you pay. Alot of people are ranting about "Fake news". Now imagine if those "fake news" were honest to god your only source avaliable for information about the world

what we will see happen is more than likely something akin to a "forced" VPN. The question is if it comes at a per "category" basis or by company/game. For example you might need a bnet package then a SE package. One major misconception is that those that were ok with thsi repeal tend to fall on "well the internet was ok before NN!" the problem with that is NN has been a part of the infrastructure in the USA since 1996, predatory practices by the likes of Comcast are what prompted their reclassification to title 2 ... that is it, literally all that happened in 2014.

Ajit pie, pretty much gutted the department he was put in charge of, passing the puck to the FTC .... which his bosses and fellow lobbyist cronies are, as we speak, trying to gut in a case by ATT. It will get worse than it is right now, I honestly do not know how much worse though and if this 2 prong attack succeeds the sky is the limit. (also keep in mind that as a foreign company SE might be subject to further taxation that could potentially lead to increases in sub costs/removal of services)

I might not be well informed but this only affects NA ISPs and servies in murica?
Meaning someone in EU shouldnt see any affects at all?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rinuko

I might not be well informed but this only affects NA ISPs and servies in murica?
Meaning someone in EU shouldnt see any affects at all?

---

Effectively, atleast by the sound of things you're absolutely right.
However, given how much of a powerhouse the US is on the worldwide scene, there is precedent to think that this could grow to other countries, and rapidly once the ISP's either begin lobbying there, or people start making the arguments that the "sky didnt fall" at the notion of NN getting revoked

Lessee here... 2015, we were right in the middle of HW, weren’t we? I’m gonna guess that the game’s performance will behave as it did around then.

I mean, I see all kinds of articles saying that certain sites could be throttled or blocked, but I can only think of two occasions where that happened: Verizon was caught throttling torrents a few years ago, but to be fair, the primary purpose of those torrents was piracy, and Comcast was bullying Netflix into paying more so they wouldn’t get throttled. Comcast always have been shameless dirtpigs though.

Comcast was one of the biggest instigators of why NN got reclassified as title 2 though, i.e a utility. NN was part of the 1996 telecoms act (or whatever it was called) It was just under more relaxed classification. Imagine like the ESRB for example, and what is currently happening with lootboxes. The ESRB is failing its consumer protection duties under the eyes of some law makers so they are starting to step in. Title 2 was just the law makers stepping in. NN being something that magically popped outta thin air is one of the biggest misconceptions/deflections being tossed around by the pro-repeal propaganda machine.

As for how it affects those outside the US, namely as someone else said it could lead to a bad precedent. Also access from abroad to US base services could see slow down/ taxation. That said, I do not think other 1st world countries woulda blatantly ignored 80%+ of their population on an issue like this, even within the US government there were those asking for a delay on this vote until certain things were cleared and they were ignored with no consequence. I do not see that happening somewhere like the UK for example, to say the USA is in a bad way atm is an understatement ... we could give places like Russia a run for their money now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rinuko

I might not be well informed but this only affects NA ISPs and servies in murica?
Meaning someone in EU shouldnt see any affects at all?

---

For EU countries, the European Comission is committed to net neutrality: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-...net-neutrality.

I think in the US the ISP's will mostly go after tech companies rather than end users
Kind of a mobster shake down style "want your content to come across smoothly? give us a cut"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nihility

I think in the US the ISP's will mostly go after tech companies rather than end users
Kind of a mobster shake down style "want your content to come across smoothly? give us a cut"

---

The companies will not just take it, they will forward their cost to the consumers. If the ISP's demands more money from Square Enix or companies like Netflix, then those companies will increase their subscription fee, heck we might see more cuts to ingame items and more exclusive mog station items.

In the end the consumers in the USA will pay alot more then they are right now. I can only hope that the court will stop this and that this will not have a domino effect on other countries.

Wouldn't/Could the congress go against the vote results?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rinuko

I might not be well informed but this only affects NA ISPs and servies in murica?
Meaning someone in EU shouldnt see any affects at all?

---

Not directly within the EU but it is entirely possible that US based ISPs could restrict access from the US to EU sites affecting companies there. You might also see the US ISPs start requiring EU ISPs to pay for access to their networks or for high speed links. So from a regulatory standpoint US laws have no effect of how the EU operatates legally. From a business perspective that is an unknown.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rinuko

Wouldn't/Could the congress go against the vote results?

---

Yes they could but the current party in power, Republicans, primarily cater to big business so it is very unlikely anything will happen for the foreseeable future. They've had seven years to do something and haven't which should also say something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gumbercules

Comcast was one of the biggest instigators of why NN got reclassified as title 2 though, i.e a utility. NN was part of the 1996 telecoms act (or whatever it was called) It was just under more relaxed classification.

---

And due to Verizon most of that law was shot down as far as the FCC being able to regulate it. So NN is in the law but not enforceable.

Unless ISPs are going to throttle your net to dialup speeds, you won't see a difference in FFXIV gameplay. The game literally uses a mere few kb/s to run. That's for gameplay. Patches may need to be smaller and less frequent. As bandwidth limits and speeds will make content patches unviable, requiring us to buy expansions via hardcopy again like we did for Early WoW and EQ.