 
JamesPC
join:2005-10-12
Orange, CA | Executives vs Web-Surfing, Content Providers, and you Very simple: "The fat cats want more". | |
|
amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
clubs:
| smear willing to smear anything it sounds like.
how can one honestly be anti neutral?
the chewbacca defense is getting old on this.
somebody with brains and some political pull needs to step up and put this in the light it deserves.
I guess Bill Gates, Google, DSL Reports, and countless others are just clueless about how the internet works /sarcasm...
It's not like MS, Google, and others haven't made a mint on the internet...
they have no idea how much "better" the 'net could be without neutrality /sarcasm......... | |
|
 | 
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
| Re: smear said by amungus  :willing to smear anything it sounds like. how can one honestly be anti neutral? Both sides are doing a nice job of smearing the other here. And both sides keep mixing up net neutrality with how many providers are available to the last mile. So far, there are no real net neutrality problems. Both are fighting over what MAY BE a problem in the future.
I think we should wait and see if there is going to be a problem based on abuse of net neutrality before we legislate and regulate it to death.
And Lessig's main gripe about the US falling behind(which I don't agree with) has nothing to do with net neutrality. It has more to do with taxpayer supported subsidization of the telecom industry in some countries.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page | |
|
| | 
BuriedCaesar
It's Not Polite To Stare.
join:2004-03-27
Richardson, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T Yahoo
| Re: smear said by TKJunkMail :I think we should wait and see if there is going to be a problem based on abuse of net neutrality before we legislate and regulate it to death. By the time any abuse is observed / discovered / reported / exists then it will most likely be too late for anyone to do anything about it. That's what many on the one side of this debate are hoping - and they're scrambling like mad to stay ahead of the legislation game so they can be "grandfathered" or exempted or overlooked when the time comes.
It may already be too late.
--
That was preposterous! Utter Nonsense! Totally unsupportable drivel! You can't be serious!....Um, what did you say? | |
|
| | 
Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
clubs:
| said by TKJunkMail :And both sides keep mixing up net neutrality with how many providers are available to the last mile. Yeah, that keeps frustrating me. I'm curious as to how many out there debating the issue even understand it. | |
|
| markopoleo
join:2003-04-02
Bonne Terre, MO | "somebody with brains and some political pull needs to step up and put this in the light it deserves."
Brains and political pull? Those words are to close together in that sentence, please retract it. :P | |
|
| 
redxii
too big to fail
Premium,Mod
join:2001-02-26
Texas | If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit. | |
|
| ctachme
join:2003-11-29
Traverse City, MI
| "how can one be against net neutrality?"
Simple- someone can believe that when a company spends billions of dollars to create something they can charge for the use of it however they want. Imagine if the government said that Airline providers had to charge equal rates for everyone, neverminding that the airlines invested their money in the planes in the first place.
It would be one thing if the internet was publicly financed, like the highway system here. But it isn't, the backbones are private property and therefore it's the right of the corporate fat cats to charge however they want for them. If you want the government to spend billions of dollars to build a public network, that's great. But as it is, the government shouldn't have the power to legislate to people how they're allowed to charge for use of their private property.
--
With the recent accomplishment of the manned lunar landing.... The 1981 manned Mars mission (1982 landing on Mars) is shown as an integral part of the total space program in the next two decades." - Space Task Group August 4. 1969 | |
|
hoyleysox
join:2003-11-07
Long Beach, CA
·Cox HSI
·Time Warner Cable
| I disagree with Lessig Sounds pretty socialist:
"The aim is to maximize wealth for the economy as a whole, and not just for the network owners."
Too bad the government has a better record of stifling growth and innovation, rather than improving it.
My dsl has stayed at $30, but my speeds are now 3 mbps down, which is way up from 768 kbps down before.
Lessig seems to be mixing up last-mile 'competition' with net neutrality. "this debate is not about the regulation of the backbone. This is the debate about the last mile" I thought that the last mile and net neutrality were completely different issues.
More competition at the last mile is not a bad thing if it comes from innovative technology or infrastructure improvements. Pseudo competition by leasing existing infrastrucutre doesn't help anyone. | |
|
| 
ieolus
Support The Clecs
join:2001-06-19
Duluth, GA
| Re: I disagree with Lessig The only reason network neutrality is threatened in the first place is because there is a huge lack of last-mile competition.
In other words, if the last mile were 100% service provider neutral, there would not be a problem.
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp | |
|
| 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| said by hoyleysox :My dsl has stayed at $30, but my speeds are now 3 mbps down, which is way up from 768 kbps down before. But your competing cable company is probably 5mbps and not distance sensitive. Dont forget to add in your phone line and all its associated crap fees. that dsl isnt $30 out the door!
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
|
| 
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| said by hoyleysox :Sounds pretty socialist: "The aim is to maximize wealth for the economy as a whole, and not just for the network owners." Uh... No. Socialism doesn't really care about improving the whole economy. Its goal is redistribution of wealth independent of the health of the overall economy.
said by hoyleysox :Too bad the government has a better record of stifling growth and innovation, rather than improving it. Yeah, ain't that the truth. Remind me: how was it that the Internet came about in the first place?
said by hoyleysox :Lessig seems to be mixing up last-mile 'competition' with net neutrality. "this debate is not about the regulation of the backbone. This is the debate about the last mile" I thought that the last mile and net neutrality were completely different issues. The two are interrelated. After all, look around: every day there are fewer and fewer providers. Ultimately, that means that if a provider wants to be preferential, the impact is far greater than it would be in a more competitive landscape. Further, with less competitors in a given market, there's less reason not to "try stuff out" since there's little potential negative impact (because your customers either buy from you or they don't buy).
said by hoyleysox :More competition at the last mile is not a bad thing if it comes from innovative technology or infrastructure improvements. Pseudo competition by leasing existing infrastrucutre doesn't help anyone. Riiight... That's why the few remaining providers all have various and different plans from each other, offering different features and price points.
-tom
--
"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficial. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding." -Louis D Brandeis | |
|
|
karlmarx
join:2006-09-18
iraq
·Fairpoint Communic..
| Well DUH- Scott Cleland is a PAID SHILL Do the research. Scott Cleland is PAID by the megacorps. Why would anyone expect him to say anything else? Much like our resident paid neo-con shill, he makes his money by pumping up the price of megacorp stocks, so it's always in his best interest to hate net neutrality.
Put it this way. If there exists true competition, then the net neutrality won't change the way any ISP works.
--
Stick it to the MAN. Support your local torrent sites. Proudly providing 10mb of upstream for all your TV, Movie, and MP3 needs. | |
|
| 
qdemn7
Smurf in My Loop
Premium
join:2003-09-16
Fort Worth, TX
| Re: Well DUH- Scott Cleland is a PAID SHILL said by karlmarx :? Much like our resident paid neo-con shill, so if he's that what does that make you? "Our resident Commie-Pinko"? BTW, I've noticed the term "shill" is thrown around by "Leftists" much like the term "Fascist". Both are terms used to discredit anyone they disagree with.
--
“Teaching music is not in accordance with the Islamic establishment, and teaching music to schoolchildren brings corruption.” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Supreme Leader of Iran | |
|
| | 
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| Re: Well DUH- Scott Cleland is a PAID SHILL said by qdemn7 :BTW, I've noticed the term "shill" is thrown around by "Leftists" much like the term "Fascist". Both are terms used to discredit anyone they disagree with. Man, I am not trying hard enough. One of these days I hope to be a paid shill as well.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
|
| | |
qdemn7
Smurf in My Loop
Premium
join:2003-09-16
Fort Worth, TX
| Re: Well DUH- Scott Cleland is a PAID SHILL said by pnh102 :said by qdemn7 :BTW, I've noticed the term "shill" is thrown around by "Leftists" much like the term "Fascist". Both are terms used to discredit anyone they disagree with. Man, I am not trying hard enough. One of these days I hope to be a paid shill as well. No s***! Where do I sign up? 
--
“Teaching music is not in accordance with the Islamic establishment, and teaching music to schoolchildren brings corruption.” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Supreme Leader of Iran | |
|
| 
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
2 edits | said by karlmarx :Do the research. Scott Cleland is PAID by the megacorps. Why would anyone expect him to say anything else? Much like our resident paid neo-con shill, he makes his money by pumping up the price of megacorp stocks, so it's always in his best interest to hate net neutrality. Before one goes about the process of throwing around the term "Shill" perhaps one should be a member long enough to not look like a throwaway "Shill" account himself (or at least sign in under his real name), particularly when:
a. it's election season
b. ones month long history of posting reads like talking-points generated by a PR firm for a particular political party (read: astroturfer).
KTHX
--
Early to rise, early to bed;
Makes a man healthy but socially dead. | |
|
DiscardedVet
Premium
join:2005-04-06
Sturgis, SD
| Some Clarity Please? Sometimes, something sets me into a brain-cramp (read: Discarded Vet = Disabled) and I simply can not grasp a concept no matter what I read of it.
Will someone define this Net-Neutrality for me please?
Simplest way would be............
If I feel that both Google and JoeTeen Mp3 List pages should go through the same pipes at the same speed with the same priority, would I then be for or against Net Neutrality?
Thanx much,
DV
--
Bush is the Prez....Think Patriot Act II....This outspoken dissident....In jail I'll be soon. | |
|
| |
| | 
GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL
| Re: Some Clarity Please? said by tschmidt :[ Anyone can set up shop without permission or cooperation of the network owners. That freedom will be lost if we are not careful. Tom, I think you're dead on with this post. Well done.
This really is moving more to a closed system rather than an open one. The closed system of course is where all the speed is, and the open one well...not so much.
It really is pathetic. And of course all the while we see the various (oooh dare I say "shills") "commentors" stating anything less is anti-business. Please.
K.
--
TheGlobalMind.com | Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? | Angus the IT Chap | |
|
| 
asdfdfdf
@Level3.net
| "If I feel that both Google and JoeTeen Mp3 List pages should go through the same pipes at the same speed with the same priority, would I then be for or against Net Neutrality?"
At the risk of being accused of oversimplifying I will answer your question simply as you would be more in the "for net neutrality" camp. | |
|
| |
DiscardedVet
Premium
join:2005-04-06
Sturgis, SD
1 edit | Re: Some Clarity Please? said by asdfdfdf :
At the risk of being accused of oversimplifying .
That oversimplifying is exactly what I was looking for - a blunt answer..
And now I have it, thanx 
Kinda like the Jeopardy show - I gave the definition, return to me the phrase, lol.
DV
--
Bush is the Prez....
Think Patriot Act II....
This outspoken dissident....
In jail I'll be soon. | |
|
GhostDoggy
join:2005-05-11
Duluth, GA
| NN will never be accepted by network owners. Why would any sane network owner allow unrestrained control and access to its competition in the service-application market? For instance, no RBOC/ILEC is going to be willing to allow someone like DirecTV to stream TV via IP to the same customers the RBOC/ILEC network owner provides access to.
And until there is enacted laws to force them to, the RBOC/ILEC should be expected to beforehand, regardless of how we consumers feel in opposition. As a consumer, we pay for access to the RBOC/ILEC network on a best-effort consumer-grade criteria. Same can be said for the CATV network owners.
As voting consumers, vote wisely. | |
|
| tkdslr
join:2004-04-24
Pompano Beach, FL
·Speakeasy
| Re: NN will never be accepted by network owners. said by GhostDoggy :Why would any sane network owner allow unrestrained control and access to its competition in the service-application market? For instance, no RBOC/ILEC is going to be willing to allow someone like DirecTV to stream TV via IP to the same customers the RBOC/ILEC network owner provides access to. And until there is enacted laws to force them to, Until Landowners and local government wises up..
They can make Bell cos. pay dearly for the 90% of the revenues they earn via unregulated services. by charging them rent + royalties to traverse their respective proprieties. | |
|
|
|
|
·