Net Neutrality
gobrowns19
Posts: 1,447
My friend showed me this interesting video I wanted to pass along that I think many of you would like. I'm interested in your thoughts about the subject.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP_3WnJ42kw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP_3WnJ42kw
Happiness is only real when shared
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
If you actually want to see "net neutrality", please God do not support increased governmental control or regulation of the Internet. The Internet is and always has been a broad interconnected network comprised of private networks and it should stay that way. If private network owners want to do stupid things with their infrastructure, by all means let them and let the market punish them for it. Meanwhile, actively oppose legislation and politicians who support giving tax breaks and unfair advantages to infrastructure providers in your area.
Every rock is squeezed for a drop of water... no stone unturned.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
You have it backwards in this case. What the telecoms are trying to do is mess with data packets however they see fit. Filter data, slow down websites that don't pay a premium for bandwidth etc. You don't want them doing that. Net Neutrality is maintaining the web in its current form.
Regulation isn't always a bad thing... just look at the cell phone industry right now... they could use some regulation.
Yes, they are. And since those data packets are being transmitted over their networks, that's ok. I "mess with data packets", as they come across my network as I see fit as well. There's nothing wrong with this.
Data is already filtered and given priority by providers all the time. Now, certainly there is a threat that these things would be done in ways we might feel is wrong, but so long as they are not doing this over your networks or forbidding the creation of new networks, that's their right.
The beauty of the Internet is that its design allows for data to be transferred from point A to point B without locking in a specific path. Don't like what a certain provider is doing with your data? Route it another way. But don't you dare suggest that someone else's network is yours, or we'll all lose the rights to our networks.
*Sigh*
The Internet is the least regulated medium out there right now and that's a big part of the reason it has been so successful and innovative. For the love of all things good, please do not continue down this path. You have no idea what you're doing.
One more thing about this...why the fuck would you want this? What if we had done something to "maintain the web in its current form" in 1995? 1985? The Internet has grown and changed exponentially since its inception. And it's done so largely at the behest of consumer demand, meaning that it is changing towards things consumers want. Why in the world would you ever want to stop this?
Maintained it it's current form as in: You can visit any site you want at any time without paying fees. Nothing to do with technology/software evolution.
There are very few broadband providers in the US and if they decide they want to restructure the pricing plan into tiers like cable that would really damage the health of the internet. It'd sure make them a bundle though I imagine.
Huh? You don't have to pay a fee to access the Internet?
I'm guessing that you are currently paying a network provider, of which you have many options, to access their private network in order to access the general internet. There is nothing wrong with this. Furthermore, you can pay extra with many providers to get prioritized bandwidth on their private network. There is nothing wrong with that either.
Also, this has everything to do with technology and software evolution. For instance, many backbone providers may start priotizing packets for video or television services -- services that suffer from the asynchronous routing design of the Internet. Your laws will probably inadvertantly prohibit this and you're going to hamper those services as well as services no one has yet anticipated. Please do not put people who cannot even pronounce "Internet" in charge of the Internet.
Absolutely! And if the market is such that it is open and unregulated, new free networks would emerge as an alternative to such pay-to-play networks.
If a network provider decides that it wants sell priority preferences on their network, so what? Why is that not their right?
It'd really hurt the consumer and the free flow of information on the internet, depending on what type of system was in place. Would there be seperate fees to the owner of a website who wants both Comcast and Verison to provide access to it? Would peer to peer comunication be eliminated except in a few specific paid for applications?
It'd be great if more broadband providers popped up, but it isn't an easy undertaking with the almost monopolistic hold the 3 or so big providers have.
Hey if you get your way, maybe we won't be able to debate things like this anymore
Extra fees? Many internet providers charge extra fees for excess usage, faster bandwidth, premium services, etc. Furthermore, many individual sites charge extra fees. This is nothing new and, again, there's nothing wrong with this.
This is an issue as old as the internet. And providers that attempted back in the day to only offer a sub-set of the Internet (Prodigy, Compuserve, the original MSN, early AOL) were horribly punished by the marketplace.
Consumers subscribe to Internet services to access the whole Internet. If your local provider decided to limit to only a subset, wouldn't you switch to a provider that did not do this? Who wouldn't?
This is definitely not an easy undertaking but there are already few places that don't have access to broadband service from numerous providers. And with the emergence of wireless broadband those numbers are going to increase. Currently between my home, office and datacenter, I get Internet service from 4 different providers: Level 3, BellSouth, TimeWarner and Verizon.
That's pretty silly logic considering the only reason we can do that now is because of a) speech free of regulation and b) the growth of the Internet in a largely regulation-free environment.
The fact of the matter is that regulation is only going to serve to monopolize the market. If you want to further ensure a broad array of providers, encourage entreprenuers who seek to expand the infrastructure rather than foolish politicans who seek to control the existing infrastructure.