Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 9th Aug 2010 20:55 UTC
Internet & Networking Well, this is interesting. As some rumours already suggested, Google and Verizon have released a joint proposal for a legislative framework regarding net neutrality. This being Google and all, some of you may expect this to be all flower-farting unicorns darting across rainbows, but sadly, that's not the case. This proposal? Well, it's not good.
Thread beginning with comment 436021
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
jabbotts
Member since:
2007-09-06

The idea of Net Neutrality is to provide a free market where any entrant can have a fair chance of competition. It is the natural state of the Internet and a primary reason it's grown as it has when other networks have gone nowhere. Removing neutrality is what enables the distorted market by big layers and anti-competitive resistance to new entrants.

Reply Parent Score: 5

Dano Member since:
2006-01-22

>>The idea of Net Neutrality is to provide a free market where any entrant can have a fair chance of competition.

If you believe in free markets, then why are you supporting having the government step in and govern ISPs and providers? If people don't want to pay for a tiered service, then they will shop elsewhere. That is how the free market works...not giving all of the power to the FCC to determine who is breaking the rules. As soon as government gets involved with anything they mess it up. Sounds like you want the government to pick who is the winner and who has access to what...

>>It is the natural state of the Internet and a primary reason it's grown as it has when other networks have gone nowhere.

The internet has grown so fast because governments have not been able to put any rules on it, not because OF government. Hell, they can't even charge sales taxes on internet sales.

The funny part about the Net Neutrality argument is that there are really no cases that people can site in the U.S. where Net Neutrality has been violated even without another law passed...

Edited 2010-08-10 03:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

My focus is the neutrality of the network far more than who imposes it. The problem with the mega-corporations is that they won't regulate themselves. If the did, there would be no discussion of neutrality in the first place. Ideally, the users would impose this or shop elsewhere but the with Internet.. what other global network are they going to migrate too? There is a far higher probability of a tiered internet and anti-competitive practices if the corporations are left to govern themselves; as Verizon and Google are demonstrating.

I also don't see the inherent outcome of regulation being the FCC choosing the winner. It doesn't have to be like the radio waves where the digital radio carriers have hosed the public through FCC manipulation. Do you complain when the Gov investigates a company like Microsoft for anti-competitive practices against the market? Is it ok for them to regulate the market when real harm can be done to it and the consumer? Why can't FCC imposing neutrality have the same out come protecting the market and consumer?

The real problem is not the FCC imposing neutrality but the citizenry allowing the corporations to dictate neutrality to the FCC. I can understand that concern along with the fact that your Gov needs a thoroughly cleansing enema replacing professional politicians with people who would do the job for the people. But do you honestly think that the corporations are going to self regulate in anything but the corporate interest? They've already demonstrated what direction they want to take it throughout the last decade. Talk about tiered internet goes all the way back to the first civilian broadband installs where Internet 2.0 was supposed to be stinking fast big business, University and rich connections and modem/average speed for everyone who couldn't pay a premium.

In anti-trust cases where a monopoly possition can harm the market and consumer, it takes regulating intervention. The mega-corps want to turn the internet into an olagarchy (only because no one yet own enough network to make it a monopoly dictatorship), it may very well take regulating intervention.

If your government can't do that in the people's best interest then your problem isn't government regulation but the government itself. I think the constitution still allows the people to fix that.. so get on with it.

Reply Parent Score: 4

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Boooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!

[steps on a soapbox]
This is the kind of crappy logic that a certain political party in the united states always brings out. Its complete horse manure concocted by those who don't understand how the common good has and continues to benefit them. Crappy, crappy, logic devoid arguments like this are why I want to stay far, far away from politics. Please go away. This is OS news. I want news about Operating Systems, not the F'ng O'Reilly factor.
[steps off soapbox]

Reply Parent Score: 2