| Maybe Cable companies maybe pulling stunts like this, but if the bells start going forward with their extortion tactics then I will stick with the cable company provided they don't do the same low life tactics the bells are doing. I would rather pay ten dollars more for unfiltered access through a slightly worse pipe than $55 a month for 30/5, in which the carrying medium was paid for by extortion. |
|
| Paid for by extortion? The cable companies are the ones that cap the internet; the phone companies offer unlimited internet access. |
|
| Umm how exactly do the cable companies cap the internet? Do you even know what your talking about. I was refering to the net neutrality debate. Some cable companies place download caps so don't generalize to all, but most of the major telcos have expressed interest in this extortion scheme. Oh and even when cableco's cap they are not stopping you from accessing hte internet they are charging you more for it in other words a direct price increase versus the extortion bullshit being proposed. |
|
| reply to grandpinaple
Two tier internet doesn't involve filtering out content. |
|
| No it doesn't it does the opposite, which is my point. |
|
| reply to grandpinaple
Except so far no companies have started any of their "extortion" that you're talking about. Just because they've expressed interest in it, doesn't mean they're going to do it. They'd lose way too many customers and it seems that so far, websites aren't willing to pay extra for better QOS. When cable companies cap your connection, they either cut off your internet connection or (more likely) change your upload/download speed to a slower speed. They also may threaten to cancel your account. I haven't heard of any DSL company doing this. |
|
| Right, but my point in the first post wasn't about caps it was about censorship, which is what will result from a lack of network neutrality. |
|
| reply to grandpinaple
Two-tier internet is about taging every packet with an identifier to prioritize, route, and sort faster. It's possible to filter content but the act of creating a two-tier internet doesn't mean content is filtered. If anything content is better managed. |
|
|
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | But let's not forget that originally there was talks about shutting the start ups off from their pipes because, as the CEO of SBC said "I paid for these pipes and why should they get rich off my back"... let's not forget where their desires really lay. |
|
| That means many things besides blocking |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Read the original story. |
|
| The original story adds nothing. They repeat the same copnjecture as you while repeating the same quote.
Manufactured news is great.
"Does bacon cause cancer? We don't know but we know it doesn't not cause cancer!" |
|
| reply to bogey780
Do you get the fact that in order for some packets to get through more effictively some will have to suffer the consequences of their oversubscribed pipes? |
|
| What oversubscriped pipes? This isn't cable internet. |
|
| Doesn't matter if it is or isn't cable. The internet is shared whether it is at the CO or at the many points of routing. Point is their pipes are oversubscribed at some level (see Verizon DSL in NY) and QOS will screw everyone who doesn't give in to the extortion tactics. |
|
| I have no faith in your wild assertion without some sort of proof of it. |
|
