Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 21st Sep 2009 19:16 UTC
Internet & Networking Julius Genachowski, Chairman of the US Federal Communications Commission, today laid out plans to enforce net neutrality upon the internet. While the FCC is a US-only entity, fact of the matter is that "control" over the internet lies within the US, so whatever the FCC decides, it will affect the rest of the world.
Thread beginning with comment 385338
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Excellent news.
by SReilly on Mon 21st Sep 2009 21:09 UTC
SReilly
Member since:
2006-12-28

The whole net neutrality debate has me very interested. Basically, I don't think ISPs should be allow to dictate at what speeds I'm allow to watch an online movie, or download a torrent or even just surf the web.

Frankly, I consider ISPs like any other utility company. If my electricity provider where to start regulating my power consumption for me, I quickly change company but if they all started doing it, I wouldn't have much choice, would I?

Thanks to the FCC, Europe will take these concerns of mine for more seriously than before.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Excellent news.
by dindin on Mon 21st Sep 2009 21:28 in reply to "Excellent news."
dindin Member since:
2006-03-29

The whole net neutrality debate has me very interested. Basically, I don't think ISPs should be allow to dictate at what speeds I'm allow to watch an online movie, or download a torrent or even just surf the web. Frankly, I consider ISPs like any other utility company. If my electricity provider where to start regulating my power consumption for me, I quickly change company but if they all started doing it, I wouldn't have much choice, would I? Thanks to the FCC, Europe will take these concerns of mine for more seriously than before.


Those who consume more pay more. I don't download that much torrent files or view long duration video's on the web. So I hope my bill goes down and people who hog the network pay more. That would make more sense. Just like for Electricity.

IMHO - This is going to go to court and am not sure if the FCC could prevail. They sold a large chunck of bandwidth for $$$$ and explicitly stated that much of it will not be subject to such regulation. I guess many of the carriers will be asking for a refund.

Edited 2009-09-21 21:29 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Excellent news.
by tyrione on Mon 21st Sep 2009 23:04 in reply to "RE: Excellent news."
tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

"The whole net neutrality debate has me very interested. Basically, I don't think ISPs should be allow to dictate at what speeds I'm allow to watch an online movie, or download a torrent or even just surf the web. Frankly, I consider ISPs like any other utility company. If my electricity provider where to start regulating my power consumption for me, I quickly change company but if they all started doing it, I wouldn't have much choice, would I? Thanks to the FCC, Europe will take these concerns of mine for more seriously than before.


Those who consume more pay more. I don't download that much torrent files or view long duration video's on the web. So I hope my bill goes down and people who hog the network pay more. That would make more sense. Just like for Electricity.

IMHO - This is going to go to court and am not sure if the FCC could prevail. They sold a large chunck of bandwidth for $$$$ and explicitly stated that much of it will not be subject to such regulation. I guess many of the carriers will be asking for a refund.
"

I'll buy into that pay as you go when all the Telcos in the US [hardlines and Wireless] pay back the hundreds of Billions in Loans outstanding, first.

We don't even have to discuss the hundreds of Billions in US Subsidies right?

Edited 2009-09-21 23:04 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Excellent news.
by SReilly on Mon 21st Sep 2009 23:10 in reply to "RE: Excellent news."
SReilly Member since:
2006-12-28

Those who consume more pay more. I don't download that much torrent files or view long duration video's on the web. So I hope my bill goes down and people who hog the network pay more. That would make more sense. Just like for Electricity.

I see where you're coming from and I agree with your sentiment, as far as saving money for you is concerned, but I'm paying for a flat rate internet connection. That basically means I have a no size limit download agreement with my ISP. Network "quality of service" is not something I agreed on when I signed the contract, yet I notice more and more that my connection is severely faster for the first 15 to 30 seconds, then the QoS kicks in and my downloads drop. The amount they drop by depends on the time of day but they always drop. That in itself is already bad enough. For my ISP to start dictating at what speed I use various applications is intolerable.

IMHO - This is going to go to court and am not sure if the FCC could prevail. They sold a large chunck of bandwidth for $$$$ and explicitly stated that much of it will not be subject to such regulation. I guess many of the carriers will be asking for a refund.

Yeah, I doubt they are going down without a fight. The problem is the FCC had their heads up their ass when they let that particular Genie out of the bottle. To suddenly do a 180 is going to cost them in more than just money.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Excellent news.
by corbintechboy on Tue 22nd Sep 2009 07:47 in reply to "RE: Excellent news."
corbintechboy Member since:
2006-05-02

Those who consume more pay more. I don't download that much torrent files or view long duration video's on the web. So I hope my bill goes down and people who hog the network pay more. That would make more sense. Just like for Electricity.

IMHO - This is going to go to court and am not sure if the FCC could prevail. They sold a large chunck of bandwidth for $$$$ and explicitly stated that much of it will not be subject to such regulation. I guess many of the carriers will be asking for a refund.


You people trip me out!

So I suppose you don't use any programs on your computer that are of download nature? Because the very people that may offer you a free program have to upload it somewhere! So that person that gives you a product (with nothing in return) should pay a higher bill then you because you don't use torrents and this happens to be a great way to spread FOSS software (like Linux)?

I don't share in your excitement my friend!

On a side note, liked the article! Seems as if something may be done for the consumer here (what a rarity).

Reply Parent Score: 1

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

Your ISP probably provides different plans based on how much per month one may download and what maximum speed it may run at. Select a plan closer to your needs, don't suggest everyone buy the highest plan available then expect the fee to be adjusted because they didn't use all of there allotted transfer rate.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Excellent news.
by ari-free on Mon 21st Sep 2009 21:53 in reply to "Excellent news."
ari-free Member since:
2007-01-22

the internet is global and unchained and shouldn't be messed around with by the government of any country. I don't want the FCC to censor the internet like they do with broadcast TV and radio.

Edited 2009-09-21 21:55 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[2]: Excellent news.
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 21st Sep 2009 22:47 in reply to "RE: Excellent news."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

This isn't censorship, and if you had paid any form of attention instead of kneejerking, you would've seen that the rules do not interfere with the internet, but merely with US ISPs.

Please read the article before commenting. Thank you.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Excellent news.
by StephenBeDoper on Mon 21st Sep 2009 23:38 in reply to "Excellent news."
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

Frankly, I consider ISPs like any other utility company. If my electricity provider where to start regulating my power consumption for me, I quickly change company but if they all started doing it, I wouldn't have much choice, would I?


To my eyes, a big problem is that the majority of ISPs have vested interests in holding back VoIP (telcos) and online video (cable companies) as much as they possibly can.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Excellent news. - agreed
by jabbotts on Tue 22nd Sep 2009 12:43 in reply to "Excellent news."
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

I pay my pound of flesh per month for a connection from my wall socket to the internet. I expect a rate of data transfer regardless of what those 1s and 0s happen to be. At the transport layer, it's all one binary streaming blob. Filtering parts of that binary stream based on the ISP'd arbitrary feelings is not acceptable. It's barely tolerable that my upload speed does not remotely match my download speed.

I don't want my ISP's "value add".. It's a simply deal, I give you money every month, you give me a dump-pipe feed. Don't bust my balls over what ports I have open or what order the 1s and 0s happen to arrive in.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Excellent news. - agreed
by pepa on Tue 22nd Sep 2009 13:38 in reply to "RE: Excellent news. - agreed"
pepa Member since:
2005-07-08

It's barely tolerable that my upload speed does not remotely match my download speed.

I agree with your general sentiment, but isn't this a technical characteristic of ADSL?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Excellent news.
by Karitku on Tue 22nd Sep 2009 14:24 in reply to "Excellent news."
Karitku Member since:
2006-01-12

The whole net neutrality debate has me very interested. Basically, I don't think ISPs should be allow to dictate at what speeds I'm allow to watch an online movie, or download a torrent or even just surf the web. Frankly, I consider ISPs like any other utility company. If my electricity provider where to start regulating my power consumption for me, I quickly change company but if they all started doing it, I wouldn't have much choice, would I? Thanks to the FCC, Europe will take these concerns of mine for more seriously than before.

Your analogy fails, electricity is paid by amount but net speed is bought as slice. Again like I said these freedoms are pee, they look like fanta but it's really pee. That means your heavy torrent traffic can be seen as "harmful", thus you get kicked in nuts.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Excellent news.
by SReilly on Tue 22nd Sep 2009 15:05 in reply to "RE: Excellent news."
SReilly Member since:
2006-12-28

Your analogy fails, electricity is paid by amount but net speed is bought as slice. Again like I said these freedoms are pee, they look like fanta but it's really pee. That means your heavy torrent traffic can be seen as "harmful", thus you get kicked in nuts.

Good point, my analogy is flawed. I guess what I'm trying to say is I signed a contract with my ISP to get a data pipe. Except for breaking the law or purposely damaging the network, nowhere does it say in that contract what I'm allowed and not allowed to use that connection for. I'd much rather it stayed that way.

Reply Parent Score: 2