Comcast P2P Buster Becomes Neutrality Celeb > Not a celebrity, but rather a tool of Google

said by SuperWISP:

So, Robb Topolski goes to work for the "New America Foundation," an inside-the-Beltway DC lobbying group whose strings are pulled by Google.

The New America Foundation, which claims to be a "public interest" group, in fact is a lobbying arm of Google in DC. Its agendas all correspond precisely with those of GoogleClick -- a rich corporation which is the largest invader of personal privacy on the Net. (Between DoubleClick tracking cookies, "Google Analytics," and its ability to read GMail users' e-mail and develop profiles and dossiers on them, Google has a lot to worry about should Washington crack down on its abuses. So, Google is using the monopoly rents it gleans from its monopoly on Internet search to thwart privacy legislation and at the same time to lobby for regulation of ISPs -- the companies best positioned to compete with it and prevent it from tightening its grip on its monopoly still further.

Robb Topolski proved himself to be a worthy "useful idiot" for Google when he set himself up as a "poster child" for Comcast's horrible, awful, unconscionable (NOT!) abuses, which consisted entirely of throttling back bandwidth hogs and pirates. And Robb lied before the FCC while speaking in favor of its agenda. And so, because he served their patron so bravely, Robb was rewarded by Google's astroturf lobbying groups in DC -- including "Free Press" and "Public Knowledge" -- with "consulting" work.

This work will continue at New America, of course, and we can expect more of the same falsehoods from him in the future, I am sure. He's likely to be involved, for example, in the "M-Labs" testing tools, which provide misleading and inaccurate measurements of ISP performance. (The purpose of the tools is to find fault with ISPs' service, so as to make a bogus case for regulation of the Internet.) This will hurt all of us as Internet consumers. But the lobbyists don't care; all they want is more big bucks from Google.

said by sturmvogel:

Robb exposed the bad "management" practices Comcast has/had and those that would like to follow those practices (like you) are now upset they were exposed.

said by SuperWISP:

Not true at all. Our ISP has always fully disclosed its management practices. Without them, our quality of service would be destroyed by P2Pers and bandwidth hogs.

said by sturmvogel:

Glad I am not one of your customers.

said by SuperWISP:

Actually, so am I. We believe that people should obey the law and keep their agreements with one another.

said by SuperWISP:

Not true at all. Our ISP has always fully disclosed its management practices. Without them, our quality of service would be destroyed by P2Pers and bandwidth hogs.

said by AVonGauss:

Sounds like you're trying to do a bit of lobbying yourself...

said by SuperWISP:

I don't have the money to lobby; I'm a hard working, small, honest businessman. However, when the weather is bad as it is today, I can take a bit of time away from providing rural folks with broadband (and they really want and need it!) to expose the lies told by corporate lobbyists such as Topolski. His group's message sounds populist until you look at who is funding it and what their goals really are.

said by SuperWISP:

I don't have the money to lobby; I'm a hard working, small, honest businessman.

said by sturmvogel:

You are a businessman. You are trying to deliver the service with the least amount of cost

said by SuperWISP:

Not true. If I wanted to be rich, I would have gone into a difference business. Providing broadband service to unserved for areas is, for me, a calling. However, our business must remain sustainable or our customers will ultimately be without service. A user should not expect to be able to take more bandwidth than his monthly fees will cover, nor to be able to degrade others' service so that he can download illegally copied materials or pornography.

said by knightmb:

Just make sure everyone gets a fair slice of the pie for bandwidth and you'll always have happy customers.

said by SuperWISP:

Not true, alas. There are some customers who always want to hog bandwidth and want your rates to be below your cost. I'm sure that the person who posted above wouldn't be happy with a fair price.

said by SuperWISP:

Not true. If I wanted to be rich, I would have gone into a difference business. Providing broadband service to unserved for areas is, for me, a calling. However, our business must remain sustainable or our customers will ultimately be without service. A user should not expect to be able to take more bandwidth than his monthly fees will cover, nor to be able to degrade others' service so that he can download illegally copied materials or pornography.

said by KrK:

Unfortunately it appears to me that we will find in this country, as has happened in so many other industries, a closed business model that bars competition and has impossible barriers to entry in place to protect the big corporate interests--- we will move to a model like wireless, of very restrictive, low caps with extremely high penalties and overages charges. This model will protect the profits of other lines of business owned by the large communications companies (IE Video on demand, Pay TV profits). Certain large players will benefit immensely while innovation and other potential advances that could have been brought to us by things like FTTH will be stamped out or seriously curtailed by the big Communication corporations toll-keeping of access.

This is the big "Pro-Corporate Agenda" you see pushed by several people here. They call it a free market and make nice little comments like "Build your own network if you wish to enter the market" all the while ignoring the barriers to entry. The people who fight against this agenda are often labeled as "socialists" or "anti-capitalism" but really, that's just part of the ideological war. I prefer to think of a more consumer friendly system of competition, choices, good service, etc which would be greatly advanced by open access to the last mile infrastructure.... Unfortunately the chances of this happening seems to be less and less likely each passing year. I expect the "market" to become extremely restrictive and very limited on choice, services, and good value for consumers.

said by Karl Bode:

As a small WISP operator, you paint Robb to be the most vile and dangerous sort of villain here, Brett. Just as long as we're not engaging in hyperbole of any sort...

said by Karl Bode:

As a small WISP operator, you paint Robb to be the most vile and dangerous sort of villain here, Brett. Just as long as we're not engaging in hyperbole of any sort...

said by fAcEtIOUs:

He is NOT a villain. But he is pushing his agenda and that of the content providers and he is being paid by them to do it. So SuperWisp has made some valid points.

said by sturmvogel:

And I believe you are paid by some ISP and Wisp IS an ISP and you are pushing your agenda. If you imply that somehow Robb is paid to push that agenda and it is bad to be paid to do it, why is it ok for you to do the same exact thing ?

said by fAcEtIOUs:

Wrong again!! I am retired. I am paid by no one. And all opinions are my own. And that has been stated repeatedly in the 7 years I have been posting on BBR. And you are right - I have an agenda. And it is to provide a counterweight to the unrelenting anti-corporate BS that is posted here by the uninformed and those with a left wing socialist political agenda.

said by sturmvogel:

Well, it is against my communist upbringing to argue with the retired and disabled, but I do believe that what you say is {sic}incorect. There is a lot of pro-corporate agenda pushed by you and a few others and it will be proven for what it is, hopefully soon.

said by fAcEtIOUs:

Your mistaken belief has no basis. And please, waste your time trying to prove what isn't true.

said by fAcEtIOUs:

But he is pushing his agenda and that of the content providers and he is being paid by them to do it. So SuperWisp has made some valid points.