FTC Warns Against Network Neutrality

R

Rich Tate

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
5,955
The FTC has suggested that any steps taken in the case of network neutrality should be made with great thought. They fear that policies such as this could simply stifle innovation.

So-called network neutrality proposals, backed by Internet companies such as Google Inc. and EBay Inc., would bar Internet service providers from charging extra fees to guarantee access to the Internet or give priority to some content.
Click to expand...
 
I think network neutrality is a very complex subject.

The reason why people are interested in having the government regulate this, is that there is a duopoly in the access market. If people want broadband, there are two choices at this point: Cable and DSL. If more competition existed with more clearly defined labeling[1] requirements I don't think network neutrality would be an issue.

What would be really interesting is whether access providers have considered QoS based rates. I wouldn't mind having a service that charges me less for low-quality service (P2P traffic) and more for stuff where I need good QoS (VoIP). Telco's have to provision for peak rates, which is what makes service expensive.

[1] By labeling I am referring to companies being required to clearly state what `unlimited' means, what speeds are guaranteed, which `sources' will get preferential treatment, what ports/ services are blocked from the consumer etc. The lack of transparency when shopping for broadband service is rather pathetic.
 
We already pay to access the internet.
Websites already pay for hosting.

Now they want to be able to charge a THIRD time to connect 2 computers over the Internet? Telecoms = crooks. They were already given billions to supliment a large scale fiber deployment they promised a year ago, they just pocketed the cash and ignored their duty.

Maybe once they ahve fiber to the home in every major city they can consider getting more free money from the government.
 
Nemesis999 said:
We already pay to access the internet.
Websites already pay for hosting.

Now they want to be able to charge a THIRD time to connect 2 computers over the Internet? Telecoms = crooks. They were already given billions to supliment a large scale fiber deployment they promised a year ago, they just pocketed the cash and ignored their duty.

Maybe once they ahve fiber to the home in every major city they can consider getting more free money from the government.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Not to mention that when the big bell telcom was split, many of these little telcoms got greedy and are now doing the same thing.

Telcom, Oil, and Media... I file them all under the same category.
 
Nemesis999 said:
We already pay to access the internet.
Websites already pay for hosting.

Now they want to be able to charge a THIRD time to connect 2 computers over the Internet? Telecoms = crooks. They were already given billions to supliment a large scale fiber deployment they promised a year ago, they just pocketed the cash and ignored their duty.

Maybe once they ahve fiber to the home in every major city they can consider getting more free money from the government.
Click to expand...


Agreed. I can't honestly speak to the 'cash in pocket' over the fiber optic stuff but I do agree that everyone already pays for access. This will become a case of the 'haves' versus the 'have nots' which we are already familiar with in America. This will be another way for big business to stifle small business. This has NOTHING to do with innovation.
 
The FTC, your source for an unbiased paid for opinion!

The internet is open to anybody. Anybody can have a website, and because they can't afford to pay for higher QoS shouldn't have their traffic at lower priorities than large companies. What would happen to a start up like youtube if this were the case? It would start up, the idea stolen by companies who can pay, and the start up loses its chance all together because of poor service to the end users.

Notice, its the uninnovating boring ass companies that aren't for net neutrality.
 
I write my Senator, Congressman(woman) and reps almost monthly on this issue.
We need to keep the net neutral. The FTC needs to stay out of this. Unless people, enough people start talking to their Reps in government ie: your congress people, senators and representives to let them know how you feel the big communication companie's lobbyists will get this garbage passed and the net as we now know it will go away.
 
I don't know if Net Neutrality is the answer, but I know this...

I do NOT trust the Telco's, or other big carriers, to do what is in best interests of we consumers.
 
Wordwide broadband adoption:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/ITFacts/?p=9265.

The US is falling behind in adoption of broadband as it is already. {See above link} If the telecoms get their way, it's only going to get worse. Mind you, being that a lot of servers are based in the US, I can see any movement against/for net-neutrality causing a ripple-affect world wide in terms of QoS to US-based services, which will only hurt the American Economy.
 
Nemesis999 said:
We already pay to access the internet.
Websites already pay for hosting.

Now they want to be able to charge a THIRD time to connect 2 computers over the Internet? Telecoms = crooks. They were already given billions to supliment a large scale fiber deployment they promised a year ago, they just pocketed the cash and ignored their duty.

Maybe once they ahve fiber to the home in every major city they can consider getting more free money from the government.
Click to expand...

yeah... Im thinking the same here...

Im going to end up paying around $30-70 per month (around 300-700/mo for 10mb for the mathematically disabled), per megabit/second for my webhosting. Yes... I could probably find other places cheaper, but this isnt too extreme, for unmetered. Ontop of paying the 300-700 dollars per month for using 10Mb of bandwidth, I get to pay a wonderfull $56 a month or however much it was, for comquack 4mb cable internet to use at my home.

Next, I hear about ISPs possibly, in the future, charging buisnesses providing services like myself, more money for higher priority? And im also hearing someone like ted stevens, talking about how the businesses are using the "internets" for their own uses...

Perhaps its just me, but it frustraits me when I pay a company to use something (10Mb/s of bandwidth), then someone like ted stevens acts as if the "internets" is like clean air or water, threatened by buisnesses using it. Even more so, when I have to think about how much more I might have to pay, just to get my crap from the servers to people viewing the webpages. Lastly, I start to remember how the prices are for internet service provided to homes. Cable, which the slowest package costs more per month than my car insurance...
or DSL, which isnt cheaper.

I dont know about net nutrality stifling innovation, but the thoughts of people using the internet for web-hosting, having the option of low priority/low bandwidth, or paying out the ass for higher priorty... I highly doubt that scenario will help improve "innovation". The ISPs are already screwing us over hard enough, Id rather not want this to worsen. And, remember people: The internet is *not* a truck, it's not a series of tubes... its a series of companies charging us quite a bit of money for crap service. (For those on verison FIOS, I dont want to hear about how you can get 5-30mbs for how much a month, its only torture to us with cable or DSL at our door).
 
TechLarry said:
I don't know if Net Neutrality is the answer, but I know this...

I do NOT trust the Telco's, or other big carriers, to do what is in best interests of we consumers.
Click to expand...



You too eh ? Look at this


Kinda OT,but what the heck...

If you watch it,and you really should,pay special attention to the AT&T technician and the part on the NSA. :eek: :mad: This is also happening up here in Canada.This
is not conspiracy theory shit,but very real,and damn scary. Kinda OT,but what the heck...
 
Everybody in DC is bought and paid for by the bankers (Rothchilds...etc)
and the corporations (GE #1)
Only a VERY few exceptions.
"If my sons did not want wars, there would be no wars."
- Madam Rothschild

“We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only questions is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.” - Paul Warburg (architect of the Federal Reserve System), to the US Senate, 1950

"We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order. " David Rockefeller

"If the people knew what we had done, they would chase us down the street and lynch us." George H.W. Bush, son of Prescott Bush a banker who aided Hitler


Do some homework.
 
H.L. Mencken said it well: “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”
 
Common people don't want war. It is the leaders who determine the policy,
and it is always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy,
or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no
voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
Simply tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack
of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.


Hermann Goering
 
" WAR is a racket. It always has been."

"It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. "
General Smedly Butler

google bush crime family
 
"I want to tell you something very clear, don't worry about American pressure on Israel, we, the Jewish people control America, and the Americans know it." Ariel Sharon to Shimon Peres, October 3rd, 2001, as reported on Kol Yisrael radio.

And no its not the "Jews"
Anymore than me and you.
Its the world wide crime family.
The elites.
 
The corporate grip on opinion in the United States is one of the wonders of the Western world. No First World country has ever managed to eliminate so entirely from its media all objectivity - much less dissent.
Gore Vidal
 
Imagine what would happen if the world found out that most of Christianity was run by the human-sacrificing, slave-making Illuminati?
 
“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it”
Adolf Hitler
 
SO GLAD that I'm moving to Japan in a couple of months. Even with their...different political views, shit like this doesn't happen.

OH NOES?! Did I break the quote chain? Bwahahaha.
 
Our story begins, as these stories often do, with a young up-and-coming politician. He's a deeply religious man and a member of the conservative party. He is completely single-minded convictions and has no regard for the political process. Eventually, his party launches a special project in the name of 'national security'. At first, it is believed to be a search for biological weapons and it is pursued regardless of its cost. However, the true goal of the project is power, complete and total hegemonic domination. The project, however, ends violently... but the efforts of those involved are not in vain, for a new ability to wage war is born from the blood of one of their victims. Imagine a virus - the most terrifying virus you can, and then imagine that you and you alone have the cure. But if your ultimate goal is power, how best to use such a weapon? It is at this point in our story that along comes a spider. He is a man seemingly without a conscience; for whom the ends always justify the means and it is he who suggests that their target should not be an enemy of the country but rather the country itself. Three targets are chosen to maximize the effect of the attack: a school, a tube station, and a water-treatment plant. Several hundred die within the first few weeks. Until at last the true goal comes into view. Before the St. Mary's crisis, no one would have predicted the outcome of the elections. No one. But after the election, lo and behold, a miracle. Some believed that it was the work of God himself, but it was a pharmaceutical company controlled by certain party members made them all obscenely rich. But the true genius of the plan was the fear. A year later, several extremeists are tried, found guilty, and executed while a memorial is builterected to canonize their victims. Fear became the ultimate tool of this government. And through it our politician was ultimately appointed to the newly created position of High Chancellor. The rest, as they say, is history.

V
 
Good evening, London. Allow me first to apologize for this interruption. I do, like many of you, appreciate the comforts of every day routine- the security of the familiar, the tranquility of repetition. I enjoy them as much as any bloke. But in the spirit of commemoration, thereby those important events of the past usually associated with someone's death or the end of some awful bloody struggle, a celebration of a nice holiday, I thought we could mark this November the 5th, a day that is sadly no longer remembered, by taking some time out of our daily lives to sit down and have a little chat. There are of course those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even now, orders are being shouted into telephones, and men with guns will soon be on their way. Why? Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the now high chancellor, Adam Sutler. He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent. Last night I sought to end that silence. Last night I destroyed the Old Bailey, to remind this country of what it has forgotten. More than four hundred years ago a great citizen wished to embed the fifth of November forever in our memory. His hope was to remind the world that fairness, justice, and freedom are more than words, they are perspectives. So if you've seen nothing, if the crimes of this government remain unknown to you then I would suggest you allow the fifth of November to pass unmarked. But if you see what I see, if you feel as I feel, and if you would seek as I seek, then I ask you to stand beside me one year from tonight, outside the gates of Parliament, and together we shall give them a fifth of November that shall never, ever be forgot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top