Net Neutrality?

[JBeukema]

So... the idea is to mandate that companies give equal priority to all traffic across their servers?

And people compare this to the 'Fairness Doctrine' and take issue with this why, exactly?

I seem to have missed something.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Net Neutrality would require that content providers give equal access to everyone. In other words, if you spent millions of dollars in setting up a site, and wanted to stream your content for free, and I popped in with high resolution video that chocked your servers saying that you are evil and no one should acknowledge your existence, you would not be able to force me, or the people who prefer what I have to say, to pay for the extra bandwidth we are using.

Tell me again why this is a good idea.

 

[Revere]

If you build the best network in the country, you have to sell to your competitors so they can access it, too. So what's the incentive to build the best network in the country?

 

[JBeukema]

If you build the best network in the country, you have to sell to your competitors so they can access it, too. So what's the incentive to build the best network in the country?

Sounds like how it got started when it was a government program.

 

[JBeukema]

Net Neutrality would require that content providers give equal access to everyone. In other words, if you spent millions of dollars in setting up a site, and wanted to stream your content for free, and I popped in with high resolution video that chocked your servers saying that you are evil and no one should acknowledge your existence, you would not be able to force me, or the people who prefer what I have to say, to pay for the extra bandwidth we are using.

Tell me again why this is a good idea.

Then why would anyone compare it to the Fairness Doctrine?

Wouldn't it be more like providing electricity to someone's house for a flat subscription fee, regardless of how much energy they used, thereby forcing the little man (who uses less energy) to subsidize the energy used by corporation or rich man (who uses much more electricity)?


From what you're sayin', the Republicans should be all for this- make the guys who draw no traffic to subsidize the GOP's homepage and the sites of their big business buddies.

 

[Trajan]

net neutrality is just another not so clever in for the gov. to tax and 'structure' the net in earnest.

In effect they wish to make themselves the traffic cops over bandwidth ( for now, content next), this is not like the airwaves where in they license and apportion frequencies etc. They have no right to appoint themselves traffic cops over streets they didn't create, fund.

As usual its about money and power.

 

[Revere]

When everyone had rotary phones, everyone was equal.

 

[Saikron]

You're trying to discuss a topic with as much nuance as net neutrality on THIS forum?

 

[Toronado3800]

Most individuals will not be affected by this yet. I just do not watch enough Netflix to qualify for paying extra.

The problem comes when I fire up a website. Lets call it "MarcTube". If it gets very popular I have to pay out the butt for bandwidth.

It is opposite the way electricity works. It is not the way the internet was made great though. Sometimes to create something we have to bite the bullet. To create a nearly free internet where Iranian students can post videos from their cell phones we need this system.

Net Neutrality. What a ridiculous name though. I can't even keep straight what it means.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The government needs to keep its claws off the Internet. Everything they touch they fuck up.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Most individuals will not be affected by this yet. I just do not watch enough Netflix to qualify for paying extra.

The problem comes when I fire up a website. Lets call it "MarcTube". If it gets very popular I have to pay out the butt for bandwidth.

It is opposite the way electricity works. It is not the way the internet was made great though. Sometimes to create something we have to bite the bullet. To create a nearly free internet where Iranian students can post videos from their cell phones we need this system.

Net Neutrality. What a ridiculous name though. I can't even keep straight what it means.

You don't have to pay more for electricity if you use more? Where do you live?

 

[JBeukema]

Most individuals will not be affected by this yet. I just do not watch enough Netflix to qualify for paying extra.

The problem comes when I fire up a website. Lets call it "MarcTube". If it gets very popular I have to pay out the butt for bandwidth.

Isn't that the way it works now? I know when I bought webspace a few years back, it stated my total server space and also my bandwidth alloted.

 

[JBeukema]

The government needs to keep its claws off the Internet. Everything they touch they fuck up.

Do you know where the internet came from?

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

You see who is for it, something is wrong with it
They created a strawman argument to choke out unwanted voices under the guise of saving the internet.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWt0XUocViE[/ame]

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The government needs to keep its claws off the Internet. Everything they touch they fuck up.

Do you know where the internet came from?

Yes, Al Gore invented it.

But on a serious note, yes, it was started up by the military, but the government has basically kept their hands off when it comes to regulation and let it be a free entity. There is no reason to change that, especially with this "net neutrality" plan.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The government needs to keep its claws off the Internet. Everything they touch they fuck up.

Do you know where the internet came from?

Yes, Al Gore invented it.

But on a serious note, yes, it was started up by the military, but the government has basically kept their hands off when it comes to regulation and let it be a free entity. There is no reason to change that, especially with this "net neutrality" plan.

The Internet has functioned under the rules of "Net Neutrality" since it's creation. The law would codify the current situation, nothing more.

 

[Ragnar]

See:

Net Neutrality vs. Internet Freedom
The Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights: Net Neutrality vs. Internet Freedom

...

The specter of ISPs offering glacial access to certain websites is a smokescreen, designed to obscure the net-neutrality movement's goal: preventing anyone from having superior, unequal access to customers. In the minds of net-neutrality advocates, the Internet is a collectively owned entity, to which all websites have an equal claim and are entitled "equal access." As the title of a leading net-neutrality group proclaims: "It's our Net."

But it isn't.

The Internet is not a collectivist commune; it is a free, voluntary, and private association of individuals and corporations harmoniously pursuing their individual goals. (While it began as a government-funded project, the Internet's ultra-advanced state today is the achievement of private network builders, hardware companies, content providers, and customers.) Because the Internet is based on voluntary association, no one can properly compel others for their ad space, bandwidth, publicity--or data prioritization. Those who create these values have the right to use and profit from them as they see fit. Google has no more right to demand that Verizon be "neutral" with its network than Verizon has a right to demand that Google be "neutral" with its coveted advertising space.

The only thing equal about the participants on the Internet is that all have equal freedom to deal with others voluntarily. This means they are equally free to compete for the bandwidth, dollars, and talents of others--but not entitled to an unearned, equal portion of them.

It is the freedom of participants on the Internet to offer and profit from whatever products, services, or content they choose that has made it such a phenomenal source of content and innovation. Net neutrality would deny ISPs that freedom. It would deny their right to engage in creative, innovative, and profitable activity with those networks--in the name of those who demand their bandwidth, but are unable or unwilling to earn it in a free market.

...

Same old same old. Same argument applied to a new issue. Your either for Net Neutrality and a pinko commie scumbag happy to enslave and murder millions, or (like me) your against Net Neutrality and a true blue "real" American Capitalist freedom loving huger of puppies.

Choose wisely.

 

[Trajan]

Do you know where the internet came from?

Yes, Al Gore invented it.

But on a serious note, yes, it was started up by the military, but the government has basically kept their hands off when it comes to regulation and let it be a free entity. There is no reason to change that, especially with this "net neutrality" plan.

The Internet has functioned under the rules of "Net Neutrality" since it's creation. The law would codify the current situation, nothing more.

no frankly it hasn't, unless your idea of 'net neutrality' is way off ours.


Today's meeting is the first in a series of focused discussions, with ITI serving as facilitator, aimed at developing Internet openness principles that can achieve broad cross-sector support," said Dean Garfield, president of ITI, in a statement. "Over the last few months, much work has been directed at developing such a solution—including by Google—with significant positive steps forward."

Similar negotiations fell apart earlier this month at the FCC after Google Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. announced their own legislative proposal for giving the FCC authority to be Internet traffic cop. The companies' proposal dealt with the issue of "net neutrality," a shorthand for the principle that broadband providers shouldn't deliberately slow or block legal Internet traffic.

The companies were criticized by some for their proposal, which wouldn't apply net neutrality rules to fast-growing wireless networks.

The proposal also would have given Internet providers wide latitude to create priority lanes of Internet traffic for companies who pay for priority delivery service.

Google isn't involved in the current closed-door negotiations, a spokeswoman confirmed. "We took our best shot at a constructive proposal. This is an important issue and we support any attempt to move the ball forward," she said.

FCC officials also aren't actively involved. "While we're not involved in these new discussions, we're glad that there is ongoing dialogue," a FCC spokeswoman said in a statement.

Along with Cisco and Microsoft, the current negotiations include representatives from AT&T Inc., Verizon and the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, which represents cable companies.

Spokespeople of the companies didn't immediately return calls about their involvement in the negotiations.

The Information Technology Industry Council, which is hosting the talks, represents Dell Inc., International Business Machines Corp. and Microsoft Corp., among other companies.

Phone and cable companies have been trying to reach an industry compromise on the issue of net neutrality in hopes of preventing the FCC from moving forward with a proposal for re-regulating Internet lines so the agency can enforce net neutrality rules.

Telecommunications companies say re-regulating Internet lines under rules designed for old phone networks will discourage new investments in wireless or Internet lines. Internet companies and public interest groups want the FCC to have clear authority to enforce net neutrality rules to prevent broadband providers from deliberately favoring some traffic over others.

rest at-

Lobbyists Resume Talks Over Net Neutrality - WSJ.com

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Yes, Al Gore invented it.

But on a serious note, yes, it was started up by the military, but the government has basically kept their hands off when it comes to regulation and let it be a free entity. There is no reason to change that, especially with this "net neutrality" plan.

The Internet has functioned under the rules of "Net Neutrality" since it's creation. The law would codify the current situation, nothing more.

no frankly it hasn't, unless your idea of 'net neutrality' is way off ours.


Today's meeting is the first in a series of focused discussions, with ITI serving as facilitator, aimed at developing Internet openness principles that can achieve broad cross-sector support," said Dean Garfield, president of ITI, in a statement. "Over the last few months, much work has been directed at developing such a solution—including by Google—with significant positive steps forward."

Similar negotiations fell apart earlier this month at the FCC after Google Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. announced their own legislative proposal for giving the FCC authority to be Internet traffic cop. The companies' proposal dealt with the issue of "net neutrality," a shorthand for the principle that broadband providers shouldn't deliberately slow or block legal Internet traffic.

The companies were criticized by some for their proposal, which wouldn't apply net neutrality rules to fast-growing wireless networks.

The proposal also would have given Internet providers wide latitude to create priority lanes of Internet traffic for companies who pay for priority delivery service.

Google isn't involved in the current closed-door negotiations, a spokeswoman confirmed. "We took our best shot at a constructive proposal. This is an important issue and we support any attempt to move the ball forward," she said.

FCC officials also aren't actively involved. "While we're not involved in these new discussions, we're glad that there is ongoing dialogue," a FCC spokeswoman said in a statement.

Along with Cisco and Microsoft, the current negotiations include representatives from AT&T Inc., Verizon and the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, which represents cable companies.

Spokespeople of the companies didn't immediately return calls about their involvement in the negotiations.

The Information Technology Industry Council, which is hosting the talks, represents Dell Inc., International Business Machines Corp. and Microsoft Corp., among other companies.

Phone and cable companies have been trying to reach an industry compromise on the issue of net neutrality in hopes of preventing the FCC from moving forward with a proposal for re-regulating Internet lines so the agency can enforce net neutrality rules.

Telecommunications companies say re-regulating Internet lines under rules designed for old phone networks will discourage new investments in wireless or Internet lines. Internet companies and public interest groups want the FCC to have clear authority to enforce net neutrality rules to prevent broadband providers from deliberately favoring some traffic over others.

rest at-

Lobbyists Resume Talks Over Net Neutrality - WSJ.com

To my knowledge, no ISPs have started prioritizing bandwidth to websites that pay more, or offering "Premium packages" for customers like cable tv - which is the only thing addressed by "Net Neutrality".

 

[asterism]

Companies that own the connections between their customers and the Internet should not be restricted from shaping and managing traffic to provide the services their customers want. I first heard about the concept of net neutrality by an advocate who was miffed at having his torrent downloads slow down.