EU Moves To Create Internet Fast Lanes, Pretends It's Net Neutrality By Redefining Basic Words

from the if-we-just-call-it-net-neutrality,-maybe-no-one-will-notice dept

Tue, Jun 30th 2015 9:31am — Mike Masnick

In 2014, it really looked like Europe was moving towards strong net neutrality, while the US was going to allow for special fast lanes on the internet. In 2015... everything has gone the other way. The US passed real net neutrality rules, while Europe has not only decided to kill net neutrality, but has done so in a way where they pretend that they're actually supporting net neutrality.

In some way, this isn't a surprise. EU Digital Commissioner Gunther Oettinger recently mocked net neutrality and its supporters, saying they had turned it into a "Taliban-like" issue. Then a month ago, rumors started to fly that the weekly "trialogue" meetings between the EU Commission, the Council of the EU and the EU Parliament was looking to ditch net neutrality altogether. Instead, it appears that the final solution was actually to redefine net neutrality to pretend they were offering it, while really killing it. And, as a consolation prize, they're killing off roaming charges around Europe (which can be pretty extreme). But that is little consolation for the fact that they're actually destroying net neutrality in the process.

The little trick being pulled by politicians who apparently think the public is too stupid to understand this is to redefine net neutrality. First, they claim that the "open internet" is really important and they won't allow paid prioritization. This part all sounds good:

The rules enshrine the principle of net neutrality into EU law: no blocking or throttling of online content, applications and services. It means that there will be truly common EU-wide Internet rules, contributing to a single market and reversing current fragmentation.
Every European must be able to have access to the open Internet and all content and service providers must be able to provide their services via a high-quality open Internet.
All traffic will be treated equally. This means, for example, that there can be no paid prioritisation of traffic in the Internet access service. At the same time, equal treatment allows reasonable day-to-day traffic management according to justified technical requirements, and which must be independent of the origin or destination of the traffic.

Sounds good, right? But there's a pretty big catch. Those rules and the "open internet" don't cover what most people think of as the internet. Instead, it's been boxed in. Because the deal also creates a made up new categorization known as "specialized services" where such prioritization will be allowed.

What are specialised services (innovative services or services other than Internet access services)?

The new EU net neutrality rules guarantee the open Internet and enable the provision of specialised or innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access. These are services like IPTV, high-definition videoconferencing or healthcare services like telesurgery. They use the Internet protocol and the same access network but require a significant improvement in quality or the possibility to guarantee some technical requirements to their end-users that cannot be ensured in the best-effort open Internet. The possibility to provide innovative services with enhanced quality of service is crucial for European start-ups and will boost online innovation in Europe. However, such services must not be a sold as substitute for the open Internet access, they come on top of it.

Got it? The "regular" internet has no fast lanes. But... right over here, we have the "specialized services" part of the internet which, you know, kinda looks like a fast lane. Because it is. So, now, basically, in Europe you can buy your way into the fast lane by claiming your services are "specialized" and watching as the regular internet pokes along at slower speeds.

The agreement does a lot of handwaving to pretend this doesn't destroy net neutrality, but the more handwaving they do, the more obvious it is that the politicians here know exactly what they're doing:

By allowing the provision of innovative services, are we not promoting a two-tier Internet?

No. Every European must be able to have access to the open Internet and all content and service providers will be able to provide their services via a high-quality open Internet. But more and more innovative services require a certain transmission quality in order to work properly, such as telemedicine or automated driving. These and other services that can emerge in the future can be developed as long as they do not harm the availability and the quality of the open Internet.

Therefore it is important to have future proof rules which, while fully safeguarding the open Internet, allow market operators to provide services with specific quality requirements in order to provide them in safe manner. It is not a question of fast lanes and slow lanes - as paid prioritisation is not allowed, but of making sure that all needs are served, that all opportunities can be seized and that no one is forced to pay for a service that is not needed.

Oh, and of course, the new rules allow zero rating, which is the sneaky trick by which telcos use data caps to backdoor in preferential treatment to those willing to pay, while pretending this is some sort of benefit to consumers. The EU sees no problem with this, despite the fact that it enables large internet companies to squeeze out startups and smaller players.

What is zero rating?

Zero rating, also called sponsored connectivity, is a commercial practice used by some providers of Internet access, especially mobile operators, not to count the data volume of particular applications or services against the user's limited monthly data volume.

Zero rating does not block competing content and can promote a wider variety of offers for price-sensitive users, give them interesting deals, and encourage them to use digital services. But we have to make sure that commercial practices benefit users and do not in practice lead to situations where end-users' choice is significantly reduced. Regulatory authorities will therefore have to monitor and ensure compliance with the rules.

Of course, Digital Commissioner Oettinger inadvertently appeared to confirm that this is the end of net neutrality with his poorly worded tweet on the subject, in which he notes that this is "the end of roaming and net neutrality."

Obviously, he only meant "the end of" to apply to roaming, but having it cover net neutrality as well would be a lot more accurate. Either way, while Oettinger once compared it to a Taliban-like issue, his response has been more on the Orwellian side of things. So long as they redefine the words, the government hopes no one will notice what they actually did. It's the public officials' way of thinking that they're clever and that the public is stupid. That seems like an unwise assumption.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: broadband, eu, europe, fast lanes, gunther oettinger, net neutrality, roaming, specialized services, zero rating

71 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Don't blow a gasket, Google-boy, 30 Jun 2015 @ 9:57am

Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!
Yet again predicting disaster. Know why I hoot away at Masnick? Because EVERY point in this article hinges on Masnick's assumed expertise and authority. Take away that presumption and it's just ranting.

The "no harm" will pan out or not, but that's WAY down the line. If he can find some way to claim did harm, Masnick will toot his own horn; if doesn't will never mention this again.

Masnick has a Messiah complex, where only he can see current and future dangers. He claims everyone doing the actual deciding is an idiot, at best don't have his sweeping grasp of teh internets. Sheesh, what an ego.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Who Cares (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 9:57am

It's the public officials' way of thinking that they're clever and that the public is stupid. That seems like an unwise assumption.

It is more the arrogance of we know what is good for you in the top layer of the EU bureaucracy and we can force that on you since the EU is not a democratic institution.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Don't blow a gasket, Google-boy, 30 Jun 2015 @ 9:58am

Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!
Yet again predicting disaster. Know why I hoot away at Masnick? Because EVERY point in this article hinges on Masnick's assumed expertise and authority. Take away that presumption and it's just ranting.

The "no harm" will pan out or not, but that's WAY down the line. If he can find some way to claim did harm, Masnick will toot his own horn; if doesn't will never mention this again.

Masnick has a Messiah complex, where only he can see current and future dangers. He claims everyone doing the actual deciding is an idiot, at best don't have his sweeping grasp of teh internets. Sheesh, what an ego.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ambrellite, 30 Jun 2015 @ 10:07am

Wouldn't customers who use those "specialized services" simply purchase a higher connection speed from their ISP if they needed it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JD, 30 Jun 2015 @ 10:08am

Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!
EVERY point in this article hinges on Masnick's assumed expertise and authority.

Or, you know, a passing familiarity with ISP behavior. There's a quote here about "those who forget history" which may be applicable....
Masnick has a Messiah complex, where only he can see current and future dangers.

Yes, he's the only one, there's no one else who reached the same conclusion.

I assume you're also going to go comment at Fortune, Popular Mechanics, Ars Technica, The Verge, Wired, and WTVPC, calling all of those writers "Messiahs" who are each the only person warning of these dangers?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 10:08am

Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!
How much do they pay you to post this? Are they hiring? I could use a job and some extra cash.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 10:10am

Ahh, the good old Quality of Service (QoS) myth. I'm interested how these politicians plan to prioritize certain applications, seeing how more and more internet services are using encryption. How can the network even see what kind of application is passing through the network if it's encrypted?

QoS on an overloaded network is a band-aid over a gaping wound. The only way to heal the wound is to upgrade a networks capacity so it can support user demand.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 10:17am

Re: Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!
they must be paying quite a bit of money as there are two identical posts from different IPs. Therefore people must be jumping at the opportunity to troll on techdirt.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Don't blow a gasket, Google-boy, 30 Jun 2015 @ 10:22am

>>> "I assume you're ... calling all of those writers "Messiahs" who are each the only person warning of these dangers?"
There you go ASSUMING! Proves my point!

But you do assume RIGHT! The only thing guaranteed on teh internets is beaucoup knuckleheads with chutzpah claiming authority to see the future! -- But thanks for confirming that it's based on assumption of authority and pointing out that Masnick isn't even leading the pack, just re-writing. Whoo, that's not only sagacious but daring!

AND AGAIN, the test is no harm to existing services. ALL PREDICTIONS ARE BASELESS. Just doom porn.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Don't blow a gasket, Google-boy, 30 Jun 2015 @ 10:25am

Re: Re: Re: Masnick against
>>> they must be paying quite a bit of money as there are two identical posts from different IPs. Therefore people must be jumping at the opportunity to troll on techdirt.

Sheesh. Are you clowns unaware of TOR and that I have to use it to post here at all? If gets blocked, then I don't bother waiting as usually doesn't make it, so just grab another IP address (there's a button), toss my cookies (those get poisoned), and try again.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bas Grasmayer (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 10:25am

Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!
He's not claiming anyone doing the deciding is an idiot. If anything, he'd be claiming those people are treating their citizens like idiots. Obviously this is the result of smart lobbying and negotiation tactics.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bas Grasmayer (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 10:27am

Re: >>> "I assume you're ... calling all of those writers "Messiahs" who are each the only person warning of these dangers?"
> AND AGAIN, the test is no harm to existing services.

Sounds like a prediction.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gwiz (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 10:30am

Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!
Take away that presumption and it's just ranting.

You can call whatever you wish, but the bottom line still remains the same: Thousands of people come back here every day to hear what Mike has to say and very few (if any, based on how fast your comments are hidden) are here for what you have to say.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 10:37am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Masnick against
Well then answer me this, why are you so concerned that your paid shilling / trolling gets posted? Are you paid by the number of posts? The number of times you click "Submit"?

Whatever it is it must pay well because I can't think of any other reason why somebody who obviously disagrees with techdirt would spend as much time here as you do knowing that what you say means absolute shit to everybody else.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 10:50am

But its true
"The little trick being pulled by politicians who apparently think the public is too stupid to understand this is to redefine net neutrality."

The public actually IS TOO STUPID TO UNDERSTAND
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ottermaton (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 10:56am

Way to go everyone!
For everyone who thinks it's a good idea to respond to the blowhard moron that trolls this site:

Good job! You've made this ENTIRE THREAD (with just 2 exceptions) a complete waste of time. It consists of nothing more than the rantings of a lunatic, and responses to the idiot's tirade.

Congratulations.

This is a good example of why the troll and everyone who replies to him needs reported instantly and ignored.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PRMan, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:05am

Re: But its true
That was my first thought as well...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Klaus, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:09am

Oh dear...
"...telemedicine or automated driving..."

On the internet? Is he insane?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:10am

Re: But its true
no they are not
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:11am

Re: Re: But its true
they are not stupid at all but that what politicians want us to believe
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:16am

Re: But its true
No, they're being misled. Totally different scenario, same outcome.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RightShark, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:17am

How does this affect the rest of the world?
Ok, Europe is screwed. That part is easy to understand. But what will this do to the rest of us?
And since Tom Walker doesn't seem to mind zero rating, is the US far behind?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:30am

What is the definition of "is"?
Politicians are great at redefining words and phrases. It is all about the spin these days. They can pat you on the back and tell you good job all the while searching for a place to insert the knife.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
AJ, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:33am

Shit like this is going to happen, and it's going to accelerate. History cannot be denied! People form a government and appoint Politicians. Politicians need money, the rich have the money, the rich offer to give the Politicians some if they do what they want, Politicians become corrupt and make laws that favor the rich. The people revolt. People form new governments with new Politicians.... and around we go.

We can slow or speed up this process, depending on how well we form the government and other factors, but if history is any indication, it's going to fall apart eventually... and it's going to be because of greed, it always is.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Violynne (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:34am

I can't wait until ISPs take advantage of these changes...

"Sign up today, and we'll offer a FREE one-way controlled CCTV camera with installation! After we bugger your speed, we'll sell your angry expression for adverts while providing a copy of your face to the local authority's database. Hurry soon. This deal is set never to expire, because really, what choice do you have now?"

Maybe Comcast should pick up and move to countries "governed" by the EU.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:35am

Re: Oh dear...
I hope not as I plan to open a bunch of drive-thru restaurants. Then I will hack the self-driving cars to come through my drive-thru. Then profit!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:38am

I thought we weren't supposed to feed the trolls, yet most of the comments thus far are doing just that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:42am

Re: How does this affect the rest of the world?
Europe is not screwed! we will stop this! we will have real net neutrality!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Whoever, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:43am

"healthcare services like telesurgery"
How are they going to know that the packets are being used to carry telesurgery data? Deep packet inspection on surgery data. There are so many things wrong with that idea, that I don't know where to start.

This is so bogus. They are lying about the uses of the prioritization. They know it, we know it, but unfortunately, not enough voters know or care about it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:44am

Re:
you have no idea how many ISP there are in the EU do you? if one did this people would just move to a other and so on something you don't have in the US
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:45am

Re: "healthcare services like telesurgery"
many voters do know and care about it! WAKE UP and fight this!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:47am

Re: Re: But its true
many are awake and are fighting this! we will get true net neutrality if they like it or not! HELP US FIGHT THIS
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:50am

Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!
No one missed you while you had some brainfart and vanished. Would you be considerate and go away again?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:52am

you guys know there still a long way to go before this becomes law right? it unlikey this version is going to pass in it currant state
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:52am

Re: Re:
I guess this is one thing that may stop them from providing fast lanes but really, will the collective resist the temptation of double dipping?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
1stworlder (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:53am

Do people really think that the US has real net neutrality when Soros INC wrote the rules?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:53am

Re:
unless they are blocked
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:58am

Re: Re: Re:
if double dipping mean people will move to your competitions then yes they will probably resist
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Snarkback, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:58am

Re: Re: Masnick against
>>> Thousands of people come back here every day to hear what Mike has to say and very few (if any, based on how fast your comments are hidden) are here for what you have to say.

I agree. Techdirt has the fastest censors around, and a goodly number of fanboys who can't tolerate a bit of text. You are perhaps the most alcoholic of them, or you might see that's not really a bragging point.

But as you claim the "authority" of numbers -- as if majority rules in realm of ideas -- then state exactly how many clicks from "the community" it requires to censor a comment, and whether administrator approves it. ... Since you can't answer that, then it's just one censor denying everyone else the purpose of the forum: free expression of ideas.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 12:09pm

Zero Rating
isn't the evil that you make out. We've got it here in NZ, where all the internet travels on submarine cables. Zero rating applies here on high-volume local sites (tv-on-demand, trademe etc), i:e traffic that doesn't travel down the submarine cable. It is also a relic from a time when the internet was very expensive and had low data-caps (as low as 10Gb a month).

Net Neutrality was a US solution to a US problem. Europe didn't have Ma Bell, so they don't have the same problems with telecommunications that the US does. Do Europe NEED "net neutrality"-or are they fine as they are.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 12:11pm

Re: Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!
...Thousands of people come back here every day to hear what Mike has to say...

Well I also drop by for words by Tim, Timothy, and Karl.

All informational, sometimes entertaining, even if I don't agree with their positions.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gwiz (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 12:15pm

Re: Re: Re: Masnick against
...and a goodly number of fanboys who can't tolerate a bit of text.

I find it pretty funny that you constantly trot out this deluded notion of "it's the fanboys that always censor me".

Is it just too unfathomable to your simple mind that the intelligent, educated and well spoken readers of Techdirt also think your comments are outlandish and trollish?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 12:16pm

Re: But its true
Guess it needs to be said again ...
ignorance != stupid
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 12:19pm

it's only an 'unwise assumption' if it comes back to haunt Oettinger and the other officials, if they are forced to take any notice and the industries that have been brought in to make them happy, are not exposed.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gwiz (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 12:30pm

Re: Re: Re: Masnick against
PS: By way of direct insult (You are perhaps the most alcoholic of them) it's easy to see when a comment strikes close to home.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 12:46pm

Re: Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!
¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿"Thousands of people come back here every day" ????????

NO, Hundreds come back Tens of times to squabble in the forums.

Look at the counter on the podcasts, 1193 listens in a week for the latest one, 173 followers. That's hundreds, not thousands.

You alone, Gwiz, must be responsible for 50 page views a day at the rate you comment, Blue would be higher and all his are unique IP addresses.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Teamchaos (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 1:00pm

Who knew
Who knew that the Europeans could come up with a version of net neutrality that makes sense. Prioritizing tele-surgery over email and cat videos, makes sense to me. Like the poster from NZ said, there are even cases where zero rating makes sense. The problem with net neutrality zealots is that they don't live in the real world, where some traffic prioritization makes sense.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 1:14pm

Lets say an ISP has a 10mbps connection to the internet. You have 10 users all doing similar stuff so are receiving 1mbps each. One user starts up a specialized service which requires 5mbps to function. That means the other 9 users would now only be getting 0.556mbps. How do they then say "All traffic will be treated equally" when you have one person getting 5mbs and nine people getting 0.556mbps.

All they really are saying is that everyone in the slow lane is treated like crap equally.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Crazy Canuck, 30 Jun 2015 @ 1:15pm

All data is equal, but some data is more equal than others.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 1:22pm

Re: Who knew
Prioritizing tele-surgery over email and cat videos, makes sense to me.

It is a stupid idea, as tele-surgery needs to be on a high reliability and secure network, and not on the Internet where someone other than the surgeon can take control off the scalpel, or a border router error route the signal right around the globe or via a geostationary satellite. You do not want high latency to be suddenly introduced into the signal path. (If a bit of latency can get you killed in a video game, it cam also get you killed on the operating table.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gwiz (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 1:29pm

Re: Re: Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!
NO, Hundreds come back Tens of times to squabble in the forums.

Look at the stats for yourself:

https://www.quantcast.com/techdirt.com?country=GLOBAL

The lowest number of unique visitors to Techdirt last month was around 13,000 on 6/21.

Look at the counter on the podcasts, 1193 listens in a week for the latest one, 173 followers. That's hundreds, not thousands.

That's just the podcasts, not this site.

You alone, Gwiz, must be responsible for 50 page views a day at the rate you comment, Blue would be higher and all his are unique IP addresses.

I only view Techdirt from two different IP addresses (home & work). Yes, I refresh and bounce around a lot, but those would be counted in the pageviews column, not the unique visitors column.

And yes, by using Tor and different addresses, Blue adds to the unique visitors total, but I generalized with "thousands" and I am well within the ballpark with that generalization.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 1:32pm

Re:
This. And they are able to force it on everyone since they basically live in a fishbowl far removed from what they are legislating. Most of the blame goes on the council where ministers represented by COREPER are representing their countrys economic interests against parliament regulation.

The commissions illusion of being neutral and factual, while being extremely far from both is extremely clear in Jean-Claude "tax avoidance" Junckers horror cabinet.

It doesn't help that the parliament is a mess of people constantly getting bombarded by industry lobbyists and fighting for legislation without a strong coalition of lobbyists on your side is political suicide...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DocGerbil100 (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 1:39pm

Re: Way to go everyone!
The best way for trolls and trolling organisations to win an argument is to control both sides, usually by posting something emotive and inflamatory that shuts down critical thought.

Failing that, crapflooding the page with nonsense also seems to be a win for them - if the "argument" happens at the top of the thread, all the reasoned debate gets knocked out of view, minimising the number of people who will see it and maximising the number who see only semi-literate idiocy.

While there will always be a few genuine commenters who respond to troll posts, it's quite likely that some, most or even all of these replies are themselves by paid shills, who will post reasonable comments some of the time to look legit, but are really only there to reply to trolls when it counts.

They don't need lecturing, they need to be banned forever.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 2:12pm

TL;DR
I didnt read the article, just the title and all I got to say is:
Oettinger and Germany is sorry
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gwiz (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 2:15pm

Re: Re: Way to go everyone!
Failing that, crapflooding the page with nonsense also seems to be a win for them - if the "argument" happens at the top of the thread, all the reasoned debate gets knocked out of view, minimising the number of people who will see it and maximising the number who see only semi-literate idiocy.

That you think that the average reader is unable to parse a conversation and determine what is noise and what is signal is semi-insulting.

...it's quite likely that some, most or even all of these replies are themselves by paid shills...

LOL. I wish someone paid me to comment here.

They don't need lecturing, they need to be banned forever.

So your solution to speech you disagree with or that annoys you is to ban that speech?

Now don't get me wrong here, I agree that the shills and morons like Blue are most definitely annoying and distracting to the conversation here, but I will fight to the death for their right to express themselves as much as I would for my own rights to express myself.

The proper response to incorrect or disagreeable speech is to counter it with more speech.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 2:18pm

Re: TL;DR
shameless selfreply...

After reading the article I can't express how very sorry we germans are for that guy. Someone had to take the job and a politician who should receive pension seemed good enoug at the time*.

*no citizen in the EU was able to vote for him. It is all the EU parliaments fault.. blame them... wanting democracy but the police force is too strong...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 3:04pm

Re: Re: TL;DR
the police force is not too strong! we will get true net neutrality help us fight!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 3:35pm

Re: Zero Rating
"Net Neutrality was a US solution to a US problem."

This is an excellent point that is easily forgotten. NN is an attempt to solve a serious problem created by the fact that there is little competition in the ISP space.

In places where there is actually a competitive marketplace, NN would not really be needed.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ottermaton (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 4:40pm

Re: Re: Re: Way to go everyone!
That you think that the average reader is unable to parse a conversation and determine what is noise and what is signal is semi-insulting.

While you may be able to see the distinction, your actions indicate the opposite. What good or improvement or enlightenment has ever come from replying to Blue's posts?

None.

The proper response to incorrect or disagreeable speech is to counter it with more speech.

More accurate adjectives would be "incoherent" and "disturbing" but whatever ...

You and everyone who replies is increasing the noise, not the signal. Ignore him. Move on.

As one of the more prolific repliers to his comment, I just hope that someday you'll take the hint from your handle, wake up, and say, "Gee whiz! I wasn't helping the problem, I was making it worse."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gwiz (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 5:07pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Way to go everyone!
What good or improvement or enlightenment has ever come from replying to Blue's posts? None.

I'm going to agree to disagree with you on this.

I mostly try to correct his incorrect notions, not for his benefit, but for future readers. Something to keep in mind is that even though comments are hidden with Javascript on this site, they are still picked up by Google's search crawlers.

Notice I said "mostly" up there. I'm aware that sometimes I do digress to his level. I am only human and the only thing that annoys me more than someone being stupid is someone being stupid loudly.

As one of the more prolific repliers to his comment, I just hope that someday you'll take the hint from your handle, wake up, and say, "Gee whiz! I wasn't helping the problem, I was making it worse."

I would have to view it as a problem in the first place. I just don't see it as that big of a deal.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 5:42pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!
I think it's hilarious that blue outright admits that he hates the website and actively contributes to inflating its viewing statistics - while using technology he actively campaigns against on the grounds that only "pirates" would use it.

"If you hate something, do everything in your power to make it look good and aid its flourishing growth." Blue is following the RIAA's manual on what to do with Napster.

Seriously, what a big cocksucker he is.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JMT (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 6:48pm

Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!
"Know why I hoot away at Masnick?"

Unable to get paid employment?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JMT (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 6:55pm

Re: Re: Zero Rating
I think it's more accurate to say that in competitive marketplaces net neutrality exists organically, without regulatory intervention, because bad actors lose their competitiveness.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
techflaws (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 10:07pm

Re: Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!
LOL!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:34pm

Awesome, it means i dont have to buy a faster HDD to keep up with the internet speeds. I was getting worried about this whole 1gb/s thing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MrTroy (profile), 30 Jun 2015 @ 11:42pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Way to go everyone!
While you may be able to see the distinction, your actions indicate the opposite. What good or improvement or enlightenment has ever come from replying to Blue's posts?

None.

Second-most-insightful comment of the week in response to a troll post: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150426/10123930790/funniestmost-insightful-comments-week-techdir t.shtml
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 1 Jul 2015 @ 3:26pm

Re: Way to go everyone!
This is a good example of why the troll and everyone who replies to him needs reported instantly and ignored.

I think it's a good example of why all replies to a hidden comment should also be hidden. That way the whole waste of time can just be skipped all at once. I started on a greasemonkey script to do that but didn't get around to finishing it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 1 Jul 2015 @ 3:31pm

Re: Re: Who knew
(If a bit of latency can get you killed in a video game, it cam also get you killed on the operating table.)

I very much doubt these systems are not designed to cope with some latency since there's no such thing as a 100% reliable network. I'm sure not accidentally killing the patient was the number 1 design goal.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 1 Jul 2015 @ 3:32pm

More and more
But more and more innovative services require a certain transmission quality in order to work properly...

In other words, fewer and fewer services you use will actually be covered by the net neutrality rules.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nathanael, 1 Jul 2015 @ 9:44pm

Re:
The EU bureaucracy has been aggressively discrediting itself by extremely anti-democratic behavior so much lately that I really expect it to become completely irrelevant pretty soon. We're in revolutionary times, for better or worse.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pragmatic, 2 Jul 2015 @ 5:49am

Re: Re: Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!
Right on the (lack of) money!
[ link to this | view in thread ]

Judge Orders Lying, Cheating Government To Return $167,000 To The Man They Stole It From

Daily Deal: Nimble RFID-Blocking Wallet

FCC Commissioner Legally Tasked With Bringing Broadband To All Americans Doesn't Think Broadband's All That Important

Audit Reveals Verizon Tried To Corner NYC Broadband Market By Striking Exclusive Landlord Deals

Follow Techdirt

Essential Reading

The Techdirt Greenhouse

Read the latest posts:

read all »

Techdirt Deals

Report this ad | Hide Techdirt ads

Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Friday
12:15	Courts (Again) Shoot Down Telecom Lobby's Attempt To Kill State-Level Net Neutrality Rules (4)

EU Moves To Create Internet Fast Lanes, Pretends It's Net Neutrality By Redefining Basic Words

from the if-we-just-call-it-net-neutrality,-maybe-no-one-will-notice dept

Reader Comments

Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!

Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!

Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!

Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!

Re: Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!

>>> "I assume you're ... calling all of those writers "Messiahs" who are each the only person warning of these dangers?"

Re: Re: Re: Masnick against

Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!

Re: >>> "I assume you're ... calling all of those writers "Messiahs" who are each the only person warning of these dangers?"

Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!

Re: Re: Re: Re: Masnick against

But its true

Way to go everyone!

Re: But its true

Oh dear...

Re: But its true

Re: Re: But its true

Re: But its true

How does this affect the rest of the world?

What is the definition of "is"?

Re: Oh dear...

Re: How does this affect the rest of the world?

"healthcare services like telesurgery"

Re:

Re: "healthcare services like telesurgery"

Re: Re: But its true

Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!

Re: Re:

Re:

Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Masnick against

Zero Rating

Re: Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!

Re: Re: Re: Masnick against

Re: But its true

Re: Re: Re: Masnick against

Re: Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!

Who knew

Re: Who knew

Re: Re: Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!

Re:

Re: Way to go everyone!

TL;DR

Re: Re: Way to go everyone!

Re: TL;DR

Re: Re: TL;DR

Re: Zero Rating

Re: Re: Re: Way to go everyone!

Re: Re: Re: Re: Way to go everyone!

Re: Re: Re: Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!

Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!

Re: Re: Zero Rating

Re: Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!

Re: Re: Re: Re: Way to go everyone!

Re: Way to go everyone!

Re: Re: Who knew

More and more

Re:

Re: Re: Re: Masnick against "innovative services on condition that they do not harm the open Internet access"!

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

The Techdirt Greenhouse

Friday

More

Tools & Services

Company

Contact

More