shashinka
join:2000-09-16
West Boylston, MA | ridiculous FCC please stop this bullshit!
This is frackin crazy. I can't believe this. I wish the FCC would step in and say no frackin way. |
|
smellyfeet12
join:2004-08-21
Saint Louis, MO | ummm
what do they think we pay them monthly for? |
|
WaxPhoto
I AM SAM
Premium
join:2004-04-08
Roanoke, IN | Time to...
Unleash the Google Panda Army on these CEOs. |
|
Ender_W
Does Microsoft Mean Small And Squishy?
join:2002-09-14
Saint Louis, MO
| Stupid.
They just want a bite out of Google's apple. This is a big step in the wrong direction. Just wait till its $.25./search so that the search engines can pay the stupid bill to money grubbing idiots like these. And I'm REAL sure that Google is eating up all their bandwith. If thats the case, then their networks are even bigger jokes than the idiots running them
--
There is enough youth. How bout a fountain of smart... |
|
Xzar
join:2003-02-16
Yaphank, NY | reply to WaxPhoto
Re: Time to...
The Spec Ops are all ready going :P. |
|
acyd
join:2005-06-01
Eatontown, NJ
| Greed
It's some greedy BS but can they actually do it? Sure they can. Deprioritizing traffic is easy when you own and run the network.
"Either pay up or we traffic shape you into oblivion, Vonage (Skype, Google, Packet8, etc, etc"
The spam will get priority over people's Voip services I can see it now. |
|
cahiatt
Premium
join:2001-03-21
Smyrna, GA
 ·BroadVoice
 ·Charter Pipeline
 ·AT&T Southeast
·dock.net
| Go Google.
I'm already paying my ISP for data and it all should be delivered to me without prejudice.
I think Google should play this game too. Maybe invest in some network backbones and de-prioritize the traffic of Bellsouth/Verizon/Insert other greedy phone company here.... Unless they pay up of course. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
1 edit |  Verizon/Google already discussing compensation
Verizon CEO said much more than what was headlined in this BBR news headline.
»www.techweb.com/wire/networking/175801739According to Seidenberg, Verizon and Google are already talking about how such compensation might be structured, striking a tone far more diplomatic than AT&T CEO Ed Whitacre, who last year openly criticized Internet application providers like Google and Voice over IP provider Vonage Holdings.
While Seidenberg said Verizon "intuitively" believes that the Internet should be open to all applications, he also said that "we need to make sure there is the right economic model," especially in regards to so-called "free" or advertising-supported applications, which generally do not offer any direct compensation to the network service provider.
Seidenberg said. "But it's also incredible when you see the innovation that a Google, a Microsoft or an AOL can create. In the long run, Google won't work without us, and we won't work without them."
I guess the idea isn't so farfetched after all. It looks like Google and Verizon are already discussing how compensation can be structured.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
My Web Page |
|
David
No,there is another.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
clubs:
 ·DIRECTV
·magicjack.com
·AT&T Midwest
|  I keep scratching my head on this one..
keep in mind this is a hypothetical (theory) situation..
Could this slow down or hamper spam/phishing operations?
Reason this popped into my mind is before I would chat in an MSN chatroom once. I kept getting porn messages all the time, finally when MSN went to paid chat, it stopped deader than a doornail. I am wondering if the same thought is happening? Please keep in mind it was a thought that popped into my head one night. Don't ask me why, don't know where it came from. At first I thought it was kind of dumb and downplayed it. Then again I thought about it a bit more and just wondered if I was the only one that thought of this.
--
If you have a topic in the direct forum please reply to it or a post of mine, I get a notification when you do this. Koetting Ford, Granite City, illinois... YOU'RE FIRED!! |
|
pokesph
It Is Almost Fast
Premium
join:2001-06-25
Sacramento, CA
clubs: | Pay?
Are these exec's on drugs?
sure looks like it to me.. very bad, mind altering drugs at that. |
|
shashinka
join:2000-09-16
West Boylston, MA | reply to Ender_W
Re: Stupid.
Exactly, then they will be charging VOIP for access or higher priority. Application Discrimination. How can this foster competition or growth? It will only hamper it. Didn't they fine a provider for blocking vonage, what is the difference here? |
|
vic102482
Premium
join:2002-04-30
Upper Marlboro, MD | Well what are users paying for?
Users pay for the service so shouldnt they get full speed access (vs. limited access) to websites?
--
I tie a rope around my penis and jump from a tree, don't you wanna grow up to be just like me!!!! |
|
fredwilson12
join:2005-04-20
Sacramento, CA
| Write your representative
Regardless of when the greedy telcos start implementing this, at some point they will eventually try to get laws passed to backup this up. If you live in the US, write your representative to let them know how you feel:
»www.senate.gov
»www.house.gov
It always helps to be polite and have a clear message, and make sure you provide links to articles that quote the greedy executives. I already wrote my representative and linked a couple articles (including the washingtonpost.com), and you should do the same too! |
|
Sr Tech
Premium
join:2003-01-19
New Fairfield, CT
·Charter Pipeline
| reply to pokesph
Re: Pay?
All Execs are on drugs, that's how they get where they are...
Seriously
I don't have Verizon but my theory is that Verizon (and every other carrier) expects their customers to use their home page to search and since no one does they are not reaping any of those pennies on searches. Most of the Execs make a bonus on how well they or the company performs they figure that they are loosing out on that extra money themselves. Hey it is just a guess but I would bank on that they are making a stink because they feel it is hurting their pocket.. |
|
cOOLguy0
join:2002-07-25
Torrington, CT | RICO Act
Damn, this is like Paulie Walnuts, T, or Christofah shaking down neighborhood businesses, but on a different scale |
|
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Verizon/Google already discussing compensation
said by TKJunkMail  :While Seidenberg said Verizon "intuitively" believes that the Internet should be open to all applications, he also said that "we need to make sure there is the right economic model," especially in regards to so-called "free" or advertising-supported applications, which generally do not offer any direct compensation to the network service provider. I guess the idea isn't so farfetched after all. It looks like Google and Verizon are already discussing how compensation can be structured. What old Ivan doesn't realize is that all these "free" sites do indeed pay their hosting provider for bandwidth. Why should they pay someone again when they've already contracted with someone to deliver the bits?
I suppose you support capital gains tax as well, right? Why not tax the profits twice? 
--
enjoy zesty ranch man-flavored baby tacos responsibly |
|
phantom6294
join:2002-02-27
Abingdon, MD
·Comcast
| Maybe I am dumb...
...but for the sake of debate, let us assume that ALL and I mean ALL, entities like Google, Microsoft, etc, etc, etc do actually pay the ISPs the fee. What exactly would change? If everyone pays for prioritized packet handling... wouldn't the net change be zero?
Well, the net change in the speed at which a customer accesses a site might be zero but the net change for ISPs would positive... and pretty significantly positive at that.
I've said it before and I will say it again... if an ISP can PROVE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that by offering prioritization to content providers it WILL NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE degrade the service of those content providers who refuse to pay, then I can accept this model of the internet.
Common sense tells me that without changes to a network, an ISP will never be able to prove this... so for now, I will in no way support it. |
|
pokesph
It Is Almost Fast
Premium
join:2001-06-25
Sacramento, CA
clubs:
·Comcast
| pay? part 2
as a service (hosting provider) whay should i have to pay more for [insert ISP here] to access my clients sites since i'm ALREADY bying overpriced bandwidth now? Do they expect us to pay 5, 6, 20 times to as many ISP's just so that all people who may want to access our network get equal (speeds) access? It's gonna kill us small timers and honestly i don't think ity's gonna fly with end users at all.
thats just insane and any service provider who impliments it will be, in the long run, shooting themselves in the foot. I know that i'd change in a heartbeat to get an open access provider who feel that your payment is enough to give you full access to the internet.
--
Webmaster Steve
- - - - - - - - - - - -
»ppnhosting.com
»sphenterprizes.com
»pokemonpalace.net |
|
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| reply to fredwilson12
Re: Write your representative
Done... Wonder if my congress-critters actually read my stuff or if any of their staffers are familiar with me due to my frequent tech-missives?
-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased) |
|
kba4
join:2001-10-23
Canton, OH
·RoadRunner Cable
| google should become an ISP
then they'd have final say. and most other greedy ISP's out there would be forced to change or give up.
so basically verizon is realizing a little late that their FIOS network might not be able to handle the bandwidth they claim. it's not google's fault that google can afford high capacity lines and servers. it's verizon and every other ISP out there who is to blame- overcharging customers and not reinvesting the money in their networks. i'll admit that FIOS sounds awesome but it sounds like in reality it was poorly thought through and won't be able to handle the demand. sad.
--
illegal wars, prisoners with no trials, and state controlled media. welcome to the land of the free! |
|
