Sponsored By

Sign in to follow this  
Naming is hard

Save Net Neutrality

Recommended Posts

Net Neutrality is an importent subject these days, used to be thing like this went without saying, but as of late we'v had to make sure things like the internet stay free, links below will help explain whats goin on and what you can do.

WHAT IS NET NEUTRALITY:

John Stewart On Net Neutrality

"I'm a PC" Guy With John On Net Neutrality.

Leo Laporte on Net Neutrality KFI 265

Senator Stevens On Net Neutraility

Ask a Ninja On Net Neutrality

Net Neutrality Wiki

WHAT CAN I DO ABOUT IT:

http://www.savetheinternet.com/

Edited by Naming is hard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok folks.

Following our rule for no Political posts allowed at Besttechie.net, we've looked at this post and believe that it doesn't quite fall under this rule per-se.

We will allow you folks to follow the page linked and if you feel obliged to make your feelings on this subject known, through the links provided on the story page....that's fine with us.

But please remember this, NO POLITICAL DISCUSSION OF THIS PAGE'S CONTENT WILL BE ALLOWED HERE!!

You certainly can make comment on the tactics used by this senator, but we won't allow this to become a platform for politically based commentary about the contents of the bill, or congress in general.

Please remember that we here at Besttechie.net, do not want our community divided along political lines, (or any other type of divisive line for that matter) and that's why we ban political commentary.

Thank You for your anticipated cooperation!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what is net neutrality? (if this is political, exuse it, i didnt know obviuosly, cbecause i dont know what it is)

-Joe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who may be somewhat confused, the original post has changed since it was first posted.

The original post had a single link to the "Senator bash" site and that's all, that's why it was borderline political.

"Naming is hard" has obviously added to his list of links to gice more insight into the Net Neutrality issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what is net neutrality? (if this is political, exuse it, i didnt know obviuosly, cbecause i dont know what it is)

In this context, it's the principle that networks should not discriminate between traffic based on the content, source, or origin of that traffic. For example, AT&T shouldn't give priority to traffic between AT&T customers or partners or deprioritize (or block) traffic originating from, bound for, or providing a service of a competitor. The network should move bits from point A to point B in accordance with the specifications of the relevant protocols, period. The debate in Congress concerns the codification of network neutrality in federal law.

The real issue is an intercorporate feud. The telecomm companies want to exercise more control over their infrastructure while the content and service companies are concerned about the leverge that would give the telcos over the content providers. The content companies have thrown their support behind a popular pro-neutrality campaign that's trying to pressure the telcos and politicians to maintain neutrality while the telcos have been doing their Ernestine routine[0] and flexing their PR and lobbying muscle to oppose regulation.

There is a largish grassroots pro-neutrality campaign and a small but vocal opposition but neither of them seem to be accomplishing anything except demonstrating the truth of that "arguing on the Internet" image. There was a period earlier this year when the 'debate' was little more than a flame war fueled by vigorous astroturfing campaigns and hyperbole.

[0] "Sir, we don't have to be fair. We're the phone company."

Edited by jcl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read an article in Forbes about the unlikelyhood that anything is going to be done politically for quite some time. Why? Because both sides on the issue are showering politicians with donations to "influence" the outcome. Forbes listed the contributors and the amounts and it's in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

As long as the politicians DO NOT make a decision, they will continue to get all this dough. So ... What's their incentive to issue an edict? None. If Forbes is right then you won't hear anything specific about net neutrality from politicians for a long time. "We're investigating, we're debating, we're looking into it, it's a complicated issue, etc." I bet that's all they'll say until they're forced to make a ruling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't help that the Senate is trying to incorporate every bit of telecomm regulation they can think of into the NN legislation. I think Stevens was trying (or succeeded?) to get one of the broadcast flag proposals tacked on. That would draw the privacy, censorship, and DRM folks into the debate.

Not that I'm complaining, mind you. I'm always happy when politicians do nothing.

Edited by jcl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... I'm always happy when politicians do nothing.

On the surface, that sounds like a good thing. Until I read that article and realized when politicians aren't doing something about an important issue, it's because they're playing BOTH sides of the issue for the money. <grumble, grumble> :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK so I guess I'm dragging up a semi-old topic but I'm trying to understand Net Neutrality and am writing a persuasive speech for a senior english class over the subject, the problem is I don't know my own position because I don't even understand the subject. I've been googling it for many hours over the past couple days and keep encountering contrasting information.

This is basically what I'm getting from pro-net neutrality sites:

Maintaining Net Neutrality will prevent ISP's (or telecomm companies?) from double charging users. Without net neutrality, the companies can charge content providers (I'm assuming that just means any and all websites?) for a better connection with the ISP's users. So the conent providers will have to pay to be in the "fast lane" and if they don't pay, they're stuck in the "slow lane" (or just flat out blocked). This in turn transfers to the content providers either raising prices for their services or placing a price where there previously wasn't one, which means the users not only have to pay the company for internet access but also have to pay providers for their content.

And this is basically what I'm getting from anti-net neutrality sites:

Net Neutrality already exists and is maintained by laws already in place preventing the companies from doing what was stated above (though I believe I have read articles as to the contrary). The problems above are supposedly hypothetical. Regulated Net Neutrality will supposedly prevent growth of the Internet because there is a massive wave of data soon to be sent across the internet and billions of dollars need to be invested in making the internet "smarter, faster and more efficient" and that the money should come from consumers and content providers equally, the cost shared among all.

I've been researching as I was writing this and I guess after writing that I would have to be pro-net neutrality. From what I can see, anti-net neutrality is claiming the whole issue is hypothetical and that there is also soon to be a massive growth in the internet, or the next-generation internet yet this statement itself seems to be hypothetical. The part about wanting to spread the costs between consumers and providers sounds to like the companies just want to make more money by sticking more costs to us for so called "enhanced service" when really they just want to charge more for the same service, and if you don't pay up, you get little or no service.

I guess I'm still trying to figure it out so, if somebody can tell me, have I got the basics of it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The internet is an international network. So this raises more questions as to who has what.

I would prefer the freedom to have what ISP and be able to go where I want with the same priority as somewhere within the realm of my ISP and its partners.

my $0.02

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this