 
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA
| Is the first paragraph of the article accurate? For now, Internet service providers are prohibited from discriminating against connections to particular sites on the Internet: they are required to treat traffic to Google exactly the same as traffic to Yahoo! or MSN. This principle of equality is called "network neutrality." However, large telecommunication companies are lobbying congress to scrap the network neutrality rules that have been in place since the birth of the Internet. We don't have to look far to see why this is a bad idea. -Newsforge
Is this true? I didn't think we currently have a network neutrality statute. | |
|  | 
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN | Re: Is the first paragraph of the article accurate? There is no statute, but the currently the internet is neutral. Which mean net neutrality is the same thing as saying keep the internet just like it is now. That's why it make no sense that its difficult to get it on the books. | |
| | |
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA
| Re: Is the first paragraph of the article accurate? said by insomniac84  :There is no statute, but the currently the internet is neutral. Which mean net neutrality is the same thing as saying keep the internet just like it is now. That's why it make no sense that its difficult to get it on the books. That's not what the article says. "For now, Internet service providers are prohibited from discriminating..." (emphasis added) and "...they are required to treat traffic..." (emphasis added) and "...companies are lobbying congress to scrap the network neutrality rules that have been in place since the birth of the Internet." Seems like an outright fabrication. | |
| | | | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | Re: Is the first paragraph of the article accurate? It definitely is a fabrication..
The being said, the point is right on; they are trying to change the rules, and it will be to the detriment to all who aren't them. | |
| | | | | SD6
join:2005-03-26
| Re: Is the first paragraph of the article accurate? said by Ahrenl :It definitely is a fabrication.. The being said, the point is right on; they are trying to change the rules, and it will be to the detriment to all who aren't them. It is an amazingly inaccurate distortion. The author won't even use his real name (yea, I read why).
note to self - never believe any articles on "NewsForge" | |
|
| 
JamesPC
join:2005-10-12
Orange, CA
| "This sad state of affairs is what lies in wait if we let commercial interests take control of the Internet. Expect the same type of behavior from AT&T, Comcast, and the rest of the oligarchs. It doesn't take much imagination to imagine Verizon treating their Internet property just like their cell phone network -- short-sightedly milking it for all it's worth, at great expense to the public, and to the future." the guy in article | |
|
disc
join:2005-12-31
Raleigh, NC
| Any recurring charges to wireless portal beyond SMS charges? The article talks about costs for a wireless portal to send messages to subscribers. I'm assuming that's within an SMS context.
Does anybody know if wireless portals are charged any recurring fees besides that? Sure start up fees are always an issue, but it's the recurring fees that make or break profitability. | |
| 
DrTCP
Yours truly
Premium,ExMod 1999-04
join:1999-11-09
Round Rock, TX | I don't think 3G is likely to go widespread use with... All those strings attached regarding caps, costs etc. Telcos (wired/wireless) are greedy bastards. Old habbits do not change easily. Wi-Fi and hotspots will continue to rule for majority. | |
|
| | |
|
|
3G Net Neutrality: A Pipe Dream