Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Net neutrality

  1. #1

    Thread Starter
    Wall Poster TysonLPrice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    3,834

    Net neutrality

    That's not a new topic but it is front and center at the moment with President Obama jumping in with support for it. I'm trying to familiarize myself with the subject. I found a link that is basically a "net neutrality for dummies" site and might be over simplistic.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/11/up...abt=0002&abg=0

    And one of my "goto" sites, Wikipedia.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality

    Just for arguments sake I'm going to side with net neutrality and the FCC policing that (just capacity not content). One of my biggest reasons is my life experience, and some historical background, with large corporations. They will cut corners and trample everyone in their way if left to there own devices to squeeze every buck out they can at the cost of the many. Without some government intervention there wouldn't be any eagles and we could warm ourselves standing next to rivers in the winter (remember the one that caught fire).

    I'm being extreme but I just don't trust big corporations at their word. The downside of that position is the government can be cumbersome, intrusive, and very slow to react. However, given the choice I think letting the government control it like a utility versus corporations, that are merging and getting bigger and bigger, asking us to trust them is the lesser of the two evils.

    I'm just starting to look into this so my thoughts are not all that well informed. I think the internet is what it is partly because of the wild west anything goes nature of it. In my opinion, as soon as a few mega carriers start parceling out bandwidth based on their rules and who pays we will lose most of that. My blog should get the same bandwidth as Netflix. I'm curious about your opinions concerning this.
    Last edited by TysonLPrice; Nov 11th, 2014 at 08:26 PM.
    Please remember next time...elections matter!

  2. #2
    Super Moderator jmcilhinney's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    110,302

    Re: Net neutrality

    The idea of internet fast lanes sounds good in principle and that's what the providers are relying on. They imply that you pay extra and you get faster access for things like steaming video. What will really end up happening is that you'll end up paying extra for what you already have and if you don't then you'll get a lower speed, plus content providers will have to start paying to get their content delivered at what is currently provided at no cost to them.

    I'm sure that having internet access defined as a utility is not ideal for a number of reasons that will cause side-effects but if it's the only way to ensure that providers don't start giving users less for more then I'm in favour of it. I live in Australia so it's not a burning issue for me right now but whatever happens in the US will undoubtedly affect Australia at some point, now or in the future.

  3. #3
    Superbly Moderated NeedSomeAnswers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Manchester uk
    Posts
    2,660

    Re: Net neutrality

    I'm being extreme but I just don't trust big corporations at their word.
    No your not your being perfectly rational.

    The idea of internet fast lanes sounds good in principle
    What will really end up happening is that you'll end up paying extra for what you already have
    Yup, allowing internet fast lanes would be a disaster, all that would happen is you create a system where really big companies will be the only ones who can afford to pay for the fast lanes, leaving all the other so called less important traffic to the slow lanes.

    Also any new startup business that relied on quick access could be hobbled before it even got of the ground.

    Fast and slow internet lanes will ONLY benefit big internet businesses and telco's
    Please Mark your Thread "Resolved", if the query is solved & Rate those who have helped you



  4. #4

    Thread Starter
    Wall Poster TysonLPrice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    3,834

    Re: Net neutrality

    FCC chairman Tom Wheeler is a former lobbyist for the cable and telecommunications industry. He has also made a career of cable and wireless industry. He disagrees with Obama's approach.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...ernet/?hpid=z4

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Wheeler

    On the one side I can see you would want an expert in the field doing the job. On the other hand that is about as blatant example of conflict of interest I can think of.
    Please remember next time...elections matter!

  5. #5
    Superbly Moderated NeedSomeAnswers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Manchester uk
    Posts
    2,660

    Re: Net neutrality

    Of course he disagrees he is a vested interest, ...from what i have read of that article he seems to be trying to please all side, which has the effect really of supporting the Telco's.

    There is no real compromise on this, you either allow some sort of fast lane traffic or you don't. Once you go down the route of allowing it then you have opened Pandora's box imho.

    expert in the field doing the job
    He is not an expert in net neutrality any more than we are!

    Net Neutrality is a great thing for consumers, the only ones who will benefit from having faster and slower lanes would be the Telco's who would be able to make more money from it and existing big Internet businesses who would buy up all the fast lanes which would in effect restrict competition for new entrants in to the market.

    I really cant see why any sane consumer would want this!
    Please Mark your Thread "Resolved", if the query is solved & Rate those who have helped you



  6. #6

    Thread Starter
    Wall Poster TysonLPrice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    3,834

    Re: Net neutrality

    He is not an expert in net neutrality any more than we are!
    I was refering to his qualifications for the job not the subject. But I think he is probably better versed on the subject then most. Regardless of where his loyalties lie...

    I can't take the time to look right now but I intend to see what the rest of the world is doing, or not doing, along these lines (countries that don't directly control internet access)
    Please remember next time...elections matter!

  7. #7
    PowerPoster SJWhiteley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    South of the Mason-Dixon Line
    Posts
    2,256

    Re: Net neutrality

    One of the reasons that 'net neutrality' has come about is that internet service providers are providing a service which competes against themselves: namely streaming video (Netflix, specifically).

    Internet service was basically an add-on to cable - unfortunately they did it too well. The telephone companies, who could have been the major player as an internet provider (land-line) completely screwed up. Rather, they were screwed up because of attempting to pre-empt government regulation that broke up the telephone companies in the first place.

    As media companies have realized, streaming video is by far the best way for consumers to, well, consume. Live TV, and then TiVo (digital recorders) becomes a second best. Apart from a few, very specific instances, live is not what people want to consume. Viewership of the rather expensive cable TV has diminished rapidly, and as peoples money belts shrink, they [the consumer] realize that the dollars spent on cable really isn't worth it if they can stream 80 to 90% of what they see via Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, or direct from the TV station web sites.

    Bandwidth consumption hasn't changed, it has shifted (instances of mass downloading aside) to internet streaming vs. 'cable streaming', now that the broad band connection we always had going to the house for decades has expanded to a world-wide piping system.

    Selective access by cable companies has already been tried - they get burned pretty badly. Not enough to go out of business, but the consumer pays attention to that sort of thing.

    Should the FCC have additional regulatory control? No, we already have 'net neutrality'. We already have a 'tiered service' from cable companies. The question is, will cable companies start charging for something they already provide for free - i.e. will the consumer pay extra to stream data from specific web sites such as Netflix? Or, will the consumer pay more as the amount consumed increases; a classic utility service?

    The problem is with regulation is, as we have always 'known' is that politicians are bought by big companies. The FCC regulations will be dictated by those very same politicians. Lest we forget, voters are stupid; the laws that 'we' vote for will be worded such at if you don't support it, babies will be killed and puppies will be drowned.

    Market forces will prevail: most people (I suspect) live in areas where there is a single cable company (internet provider). Essentially living under a monopoly, yet are not charged exorbitant rates for their internet access. Every company charges around $30 for that step-above-basic internet access, even in areas where there is little competition.

    While net neutrality sounds good, once you put control of 'what' we have access to in the hands of government you end up with what we have access to in the hands of government. While that may be a sound decision today, as many people believe that republicans are evil who want to take away our freedoms, the regulations are now in the hands of those people one purports to loathe. Regulatory agencies, while monoliths of bureaucracy, are still under the control of the political elite. Many people who work in Washington - the actual workers - are out of necessity, apolitical. Standing up for what one believes is right is the swift path to the exit door.
    "Ok, my response to that is pending a Google search" - Bucky Katt.
    "There are two types of people in the world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data sets." - Unk.
    "Before you can 'think outside the box' you need to understand where the box is."

  8. #8

    Thread Starter
    Wall Poster TysonLPrice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    3,834

    Re: Net neutrality

    Very good points but part of what you are saying, if I understand correctly, is who do you trust, market forces or the governent? Just because the market forces haven't put it to us yet doesn't mean they are good guys and won't. Once they are comfortably consolidated I'm betting that will change. In my opinion forcing net neutrality is part of what that is about. All going back to my original post, to paraphrase, "left to their own devices corporations will screw everyone in their path to a bigger buck".

    As bad as government involvement is when market forces are using public property they should have to at least tip their hat to the public. I think we need to head off the inevitable, stop them from screwing us now.
    Last edited by TysonLPrice; Nov 12th, 2014 at 09:59 AM.
    Please remember next time...elections matter!

  9. #9
    Superbly Moderated NeedSomeAnswers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Manchester uk
    Posts
    2,660

    Re: Net neutrality

    Apart from a few, very specific instances, live is not what people want to consume
    Major Sports games basically !

    Should the FCC have additional regulatory control? No, we already have 'net neutrality'.
    Agree, we should be doing nothing what we have now is net neutrality, but unfortunately we have to do something due to big business pressure.

    Net Neutrality is not something that is protected currently so if we don't get it into law, in the longer term it would almost be the same as not having it.

    The problem is with regulation is, as we have always 'known' is that politicians are bought by big companies. The FCC regulations will be dictated by those very same politicians.
    While net neutrality sounds good, once you put control of 'what' we have access to in the hands of government you end up with what we have access to in the hands of government.
    Erm then it wont be net neutrality.

    Surely the risk is exactly that, the FCC cosie's up to much to big business and we DONT get Net Neutrality enshrined in law.

    It a pretty simple concept really, all internet traffic is treated equal.

    If the law comes out and it reads - all internet traffic is treated equal (apart from the stuff that isn't).

    Then that is fundamentaly not net neutrality.
    Please Mark your Thread "Resolved", if the query is solved & Rate those who have helped you



  10. #10
    PowerPoster SJWhiteley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    South of the Mason-Dixon Line
    Posts
    2,256

    Re: Net neutrality

    Quote Originally Posted by NeedSomeAnswers View Post

    It a pretty simple concept really, all internet traffic is treated equal.

    If the law comes out and it reads - all internet traffic is treated equal (apart from the stuff that isn't).

    Then that is fundamentaly not net neutrality.
    Exactly.

    Unfortunately, the former is what we hope for but the latter is what we [will] get. There's a ripe opportunity here to regulate content. And that is exactly what net neutrality does, even in the former case. Those making the law will do everything to hide the fact that the law actually reads something different from what is pushed into the publics eyes.

    Some questions that will be posed: will illegal content get equal rights (sic)? Low level network control has priorities for certain packets built into it: how will this be handled by 'all traffic being equal'? Sure, we understand the intent, but we must always fall back to the letter of the law, and generally, especially related to technology, definitions tend to be very poor; the legal system has very little experience with dealing with them correctly (see patents vs. copyright).
    "Ok, my response to that is pending a Google search" - Bucky Katt.
    "There are two types of people in the world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data sets." - Unk.
    "Before you can 'think outside the box' you need to understand where the box is."

  11. #11
    PowerPoster SJWhiteley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    South of the Mason-Dixon Line
    Posts
    2,256

    Re: Net neutrality

    Quote Originally Posted by TysonLPrice View Post
    ... if I understand correctly, is who do you trust, market forces or the governent? Just because the market forces haven't put it to us yet doesn't mean they are good guys and won't. ...
    The trust issue is a major point. Some trust the government over corporations and visa versa.

    The government has in place anti-trust systems to watch over corporations, but there is very little that watches over the government, and those organizations have little to no legal recourse, and are, themselves, subject to government regulation.
    "Ok, my response to that is pending a Google search" - Bucky Katt.
    "There are two types of people in the world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data sets." - Unk.
    "Before you can 'think outside the box' you need to understand where the box is."

  12. #12
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    24,482

    Re: Net neutrality

    I think the two sides of this question boil down to the usual:

    One camp that wants to allow corporate greed free reign, and another that wants abuses curbed.


    What's funniest about this is that government is at its least trustworthy when its action are dicatated by corporate interests. Look at government gambling programs (lotteries, etc.). Where's the corporate greed there? Why it's in the suppliers and operators of those predatory systems. That doesn't mean the puppetteers pulling both gonverment and corporate strings don't have other interests there though. Typically it is used as a mechansim for widening the divide between haves and have-nots, not to mention its frequent use as a vehicle to divert funds from education in the guise of funding it!

    Don't get me started on charter schools.

    Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: The Lottery (HBO) was a humorous (and alarming) look at this.

    I feel net neutrality (more precisely the lack of it) falls under a similar umbrella of social engineering tools to help return the world to feudalism.

  13. #13

    Thread Starter
    Wall Poster TysonLPrice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    3,834

    Re: Net neutrality

    but there is very little that watches over the government
    Well there absolutly is and one is the American voter. The problem with that is, for the most part, it is a farce on a number of levels starting with what someone else mentioned about voters being stupid all the way to corporations now have rights similar to individuals thanks to a supreme court that is party based. Another is the separation of powers. That works like crap too. So while I disagree with that statement in theory I have to agree in practice.
    Please remember next time...elections matter!

  14. #14
    Lively Member homer13j's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Where the dirt bikes and ATVs play
    Posts
    80

    Re: Net neutrality

    Just another case of government fixing something that isn't broken.

    Quote Originally Posted by SJWhiteley View Post
    The trust issue is a major point. Some trust the government over corporations and visa versa.
    I trust no one. It's easier that way.
    "Bones heal. Chicks dig scars. Pain is temporary. Glory is forever." - Robert Craig "Evel" Knievel
    “Leave me alone, I know what I’m doing.” - Kimi Raikkonen

  15. #15
    Super Moderator Shaggy Hiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    38,989

    Re: Net neutrality

    I don't have cable and am not all that familiar with it. From what I hear, they are monopolistic and predatory. My internet is DSL via the phone system, which is regional. In my case the phone service is monopolistic and outrageously, hilariously, incompetent. Every time I contact them they screw something up. I'm a net beneficiary of their mistakes, at this point, but it's gone back and forth over the years. I currently have a very nice wireless router sitting in a box. I didn't pay a dime for it and don't actually need it, but they sent it along for free when they made some trivial change to the service and I decided to keep it as a spare. I'm not even sure if I COULD send it back, and I'm afraid to try because they might think that meant I had no router and cancel my service. They are smart like that.

    As for net neutrality, I'm totally in favor of it. I'd say we should muddle on as we have been for a while longer, yet, though. I have the feeling that things are going to change. The US currently has pretty mediocre service for pretty high prices, relative to other industrialized countries. We aren't leading the pack in anything, which I feel is likely to change. I could currently get service from three different sources, but none of them are directly competing against each other for internet service because they all have primary businesses. The cable company is primarily selling cable service, of which internet service is a part. The phone company is primarily selling phone service, of which internet service is a part, and the third is a wireless service, which has the potential for interesting RF interference dead zones. I expect things to change as the internet becomes the driver of the businesses, in which case they can compete on quality and price. Right now, they don't seem to act like they even recognize there are any competitors.

    By the way, the goal is to reduce the world to a bunch of game shows and lotteries. We are headed towards an age of family feudalism.
    My usual boring signature: Nothing

  16. #16
    Smooth Moperator techgnome's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    34,532

    Re: Net neutrality

    If net neutrality is dropped... it will be the ISPs that can not only determine WHAT is seen but how fast. For example, Time Warner Cable (TWC) ... let's say they decide that Hulu competes with their own online OnDemand service... so they know that they can't stop Hulu traffic, or they will lose customers... so rather than block it, they decide that all traffic originating from the Hulu servers gets a lower priority and a smaller throughput. Meanwhile, they're in talks with Netflix, giving them a faster through rate and priority over their servers because Netflix was willing to put up a bunch of cash to bribe TWC allowing Netflix better access. It means that when the contracts get close to ending, we're going to find hte samething happening on the interwbs that we find on cable - website (instead of channels) being blocked due to a lack of an agreement.

    Currently with net neutrality in place, all traffic must be treated equally. ISP aren't allowed to give preference over another. Meanwhile the ISPs think net neutrality is unfair and that it stiffles competition and prevents them from effectively pursuing R&D on faster and better connectivity and that if we get rid of net neutrality they'd be better motivated to upgrade everything... I'm not buying it.

    -tg
    * I don't respond to private (PM) requests for help. It's not conducive to the general learning of others.*
    * I also don't respond to friend requests. Save a few bits and don't bother. I'll just end up rejecting anyways.*
    * How to get EFFECTIVE help: The Hitchhiker's Guide to Getting Help at VBF - Removing eels from your hovercraft *
    * How to Use Parameters * Create Disconnected ADO Recordset Clones * Set your VB6 ActiveX Compatibility * Get rid of those pesky VB Line Numbers * I swear I saved my data, where'd it run off to??? *

  17. #17

    Thread Starter
    Wall Poster TysonLPrice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    3,834

    Re: Net neutrality

    One thing I mentioned but I like to reiterate is the carriers are using what can be considered public property and subsidies. I thinks that ups the ante for our stake in this.
    Please remember next time...elections matter!

  18. #18
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    24,482

    Re: Net neutrality

    If you have an hour to listen in The Ongoing Debate Over Net Neutrality offers some interesting coverage of the topic.

    The corporate sleaze-bag shill on the panel is almost hilarious in his attempts to refute facts by saying they don't exist, time after time after time. The old Fox News approach of declaring absurdities in a loud voice just didn't pan out for the poor cockroach.

  19. #19

    Thread Starter
    Wall Poster TysonLPrice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    3,834

    Re: Net neutrality

    This is cute:

    Senator Ted Cruz:

    "Net Neutrality" is Obamacare for the Internet; the Internet should not operate at the speed of government.
    10:43 AM - 10 Nov 2014

    This is a quick read of someone reacting to that statement with pictures

    http://theoatmeal.com/blog/net_neutrality


    At least he didn't mention Benghazi.
    Please remember next time...elections matter!

  20. #20
    PowerPoster SJWhiteley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    South of the Mason-Dixon Line
    Posts
    2,256

    Re: Net neutrality

    Quote Originally Posted by TysonLPrice View Post
    ...So while I disagree with that statement in theory I have to agree in practice.
    Ant that is where we can find common ground: I do agree with net neutrality in theory, but recognize that when the government tries to put it into practice, it will not be what people think it should be.

    If such a bill is more than 2 or 3 pages, then that should throw up red flags. While it may not be fair to bring up Obamacare, the original bill, it was thousands of pages, yet we can all quote the so-called (and really are) benefits of the system in one or two sentences. Why does it take so much to say a simple thing? While there is a certain amount of hyperbole there, the government and law writers seem to have an uncanny way of burying things in bills.
    "Ok, my response to that is pending a Google search" - Bucky Katt.
    "There are two types of people in the world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data sets." - Unk.
    "Before you can 'think outside the box' you need to understand where the box is."

  21. #21
    Smooth Moperator techgnome's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    34,532

    Re: Net neutrality

    Quote Originally Posted by SJWhiteley View Post
    Ant that is where we can find common ground: I do agree with net neutrality in theory, but recognize that when the government tries to put it into practice, it will not be what people think it should be.

    If such a bill is more than 2 or 3 pages, then that should throw up red flags. While it may not be fair to bring up Obamacare, the original bill, it was thousands of pages, yet we can all quote the so-called (and really are) benefits of the system in one or two sentences. Why does it take so much to say a simple thing? While there is a certain amount of hyperbole there, the government and law writers seem to have an uncanny way of burying things in bills.
    Why? Because you have part of the party of the first part that agrees with part of a part and part in whole on another part. Then you have part of party of the second part that doesn't agree with part of the party of the first part. You may get part of the first party and part of the second party to agree, but it will be only in part and never the whole part and parcel.

    -tg
    * I don't respond to private (PM) requests for help. It's not conducive to the general learning of others.*
    * I also don't respond to friend requests. Save a few bits and don't bother. I'll just end up rejecting anyways.*
    * How to get EFFECTIVE help: The Hitchhiker's Guide to Getting Help at VBF - Removing eels from your hovercraft *
    * How to Use Parameters * Create Disconnected ADO Recordset Clones * Set your VB6 ActiveX Compatibility * Get rid of those pesky VB Line Numbers * I swear I saved my data, where'd it run off to??? *

  22. #22
    Super Moderator Shaggy Hiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    38,989

    Re: Net neutrality

    Quote Originally Posted by SJWhiteley View Post
    the government and law writers seem to have an uncanny way of burying things in bills.
    I would call it anything other than "uncanny". It is VERY canny. It is almost the epitome of canny. I don't like the practice, but the reason for the thousand page bill may be largely to bury stuff in it. That's why graves are dug six feet deep. If you were to dig a shallow grave, the family dog might show up with grandma's hand. That just wouldn't be desirable, so you bury them deep, and for that you need a lot of material. The same is true for bills.

    On the other hand, there are things in Obamacare that people like and things that people don't like, but there is a LOT that most people generally don't even know about. Some of the things in there pushed innovative approaches to health care aside from the standard "treat only the sick, and treat them to the maximum extent possible." We really need to move to an increased focus on preventive care and treating only to the extent that is beneficial, not to the extent possible. Those initiatives, while they get little press, have been having some modest success.
    My usual boring signature: Nothing

  23. #23

    Thread Starter
    Wall Poster TysonLPrice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    3,834

    Re: Net neutrality

    OK then...it happened

    My watch says 6:23:08 EST 6/11/2018 - check the post time to see if this was throttled.
    Please remember next time...elections matter!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  



Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width