From the wikipedia net neutrality page it looks like the FCC's stance has historically depended on the administration in power. There was the much celebrated 2015 change to title II, which was undone in 2017 i.e. the start of the ajit pai era. Now he is finally gone, but not before casting his vote in a 3-2 decision in 2020 to keep net neutrality dismantled. The new chair is pro-nn and working to undo the damage but it takes time.
Lol... I laugh everytime I see Republicans undo things in a matter of weeks and then 3 years later Democrats are like.. we wish we could do something but it takes time.
It's very easy to break something, but fixing it always takes more time/effort/care. Especially if you want to try to improve it or prevent it from breaking in the same way again. You could give a drunk toddler a hammer and set him lose in a museum and he could be extremely destructive in a very short amount of time, but I don't think I'd be laughing about it or thinking the drunk toddler was especially clever for destroying so much, and I wouldn't fault the staff for taking a long time to restore and salvage what they can.
It takes longer than weeks to plan, but when they enact their plans it doesn't take long. Democrats always play the game of... had we only known they could do that, now our hands our tied. Case in point is when they authorized the COVID-19 pandemic relief and then Trump fired the single person responsible for preventing fraud, and Democrats were like... hmm, we did nazi that coming.
You're cherry picking data to confirm a political bias. I'm not interested in trading counter examples, but if you could provide a scientific source that shows the pattern, that might be actually convincing.
Carriers do all kinds of filtering. They've blocked mail, file transfer, network discovery, and others for a long time. cgNAT blocks half of everything.
Yep - best practice is to always tunnel, or reverse proxy out on a random port if you're self-hosting anything. Have had many providers over the years and have anecdotally found that experience to be very true.
Yeah, in the past I tunneled everything through a VPS. These days I no longer bother, but I'm also getting service via a small ISP. It's a co-op and I got voted onto the board, so I have reasonable confidence against shenanigans.
I've certainly dreamed of a co-op / credit union isp.
I think in absolute numbers there are a lot of people who would value that, but only one or two people in any given area, so no way to service them. (Not considering sattelite for both bandwidth and latency reasons.)
A long time ago I was in some newsgroup or irc channnel and someone from Russia I think it was, was just casually describing their internet connection like it was normal but it was blowing my mind, which was basically some kind of totally home grown adhoc very local lash-up where they had 100M cat5 ethernet right to their appartment and strung between a few neighboring buildings. It wasn't clear who operated or provided the uplink but the switches and last bits of cat5 were just done by the local residents. No real "isp" like a US individual subscribing directly and individually from Comcast etc. Presumably there was some sort of co-op arrangement to share the cost of the actual shared connection.
I don't know at the time the idea of just running your own cat5 among a neighborhoods worth of buildings and getting way way WAY better service than what I could get paying even hundreds of $ as an individual residential consumer just blew my mind. Surely in the US some code inspector or other government official would come along and declare the cables illegal on some pretext or another, and surely the isp would call it some sort of theft or abuse.
You can do something similar in the US - many condos have it setup where they technically are an ISP and pay for transit.
Usually it's not worth it because you end up doing end-user support for every neighbor and people are dumb as rocks. But you'd be surprised how cheap a "very fast" transit internet connection can be.
Maybe they're forwarding the port to an internal service running on the router, instead of blocking it. At the very least, it would be nice if they let you turn it off.