4 ms·

Net neutrality: Are all bits created equal?

protomyth 17y ago
I would like a bill that expressly prohibits the blocking of ports or protocols without the account holder's permission. I also wish I could prioritize my own traffic (skype > download). Yeah, I know, I want the pony.
- mrkurt 17y ago
  I would prefer legislation that attempts to nerf the power of broadband providers by increasing competition. This might look like open access rules, it might look like something else. The problem isn't that particular providers do things that their customers might not like, the problem is that a large number of those customers have (at best) the choice of two companies to buy from... and those two companies are state subsidized monopolies.
  - protomyth 17y ago
    Yeah, but there are plenty of places in the USA (and I suspect other countries) where there will only be 1 or 2 providers based on geography and profit analysis. So, I really would like the protection.
    - electromagnetic 17y ago
      Could be resolved, but the steps taken would be difficult to accomplish. Essentially the government would need to claim ownership of the fibre, and all ISPs lease fibre based on usage. Essentially if I switch service, ISP1 stops paying for my usage and ISP2 picks it up. However, this presents the problem that the government will then control the fibre and maintenance costs will rise like a rocket to the moon. So perhaps the ideal resolution to our problems could become the biggest hindrance to lowering costs.
electromagnetic 17y ago
If net neutrality fails, companies like Google can easily play hard ball and potentially bring ISP's down. Everyone on the throttling ISP's network asking for money from website owner, instead of getting Youtube or Google, Facebook, Wikipedia and the many other Alexa top 100 sites, they get "This website cannot be reached by your service provider, please consider switching Internet Service Provider". I'm sorry, if all my favourite websites start telling me I have to change ISP to use them, I'm going to change my ISP. Without google I'm out, it has my Docs and my Emails, plus I wouldn't know how to find something online without it (I could, but Bing is suck ass and beyond Yahoo my suckometer stops registering). Even now, if google suggested I switch ISP for better performance, I'd switch ISP. Heck, I even have my DNS through google! I wouldn't have websites without google right now.
bricestacey 17y ago
Another ISP tried to restrict bit torrent traffic and got pages and pages of bad press as a result. That would be Comcast.

I would like a bill that expressly prohibits the blocking of ports or protocols without the account holder's permission. I also wish I could prioritize my own traffic (skype > download). Yeah, I know, I want the pony.

mrkurt 17y ago
I would prefer legislation that attempts to nerf the power of broadband providers by increasing competition. This might look like open access rules, it might look like something else. The problem isn't that particular providers do things that their customers might not like, the problem is that a large number of those customers have (at best) the choice of two companies to buy from... and those two companies are state subsidized monopolies.
- protomyth 17y ago
  Yeah, but there are plenty of places in the USA (and I suspect other countries) where there will only be 1 or 2 providers based on geography and profit analysis. So, I really would like the protection.
  - electromagnetic 17y ago
    Could be resolved, but the steps taken would be difficult to accomplish. Essentially the government would need to claim ownership of the fibre, and all ISPs lease fibre based on usage. Essentially if I switch service, ISP1 stops paying for my usage and ISP2 picks it up. However, this presents the problem that the government will then control the fibre and maintenance costs will rise like a rocket to the moon. So perhaps the ideal resolution to our problems could become the biggest hindrance to lowering costs.

electromagnetic 17y ago

If net neutrality fails, companies like Google can easily play hard ball and potentially bring ISP's down. Everyone on the throttling ISP's network asking for money from website owner, instead of getting Youtube or Google, Facebook, Wikipedia and the many other Alexa top 100 sites, they get "This website cannot be reached by your service provider, please consider switching Internet Service Provider". I'm sorry, if all my favourite websites start telling me I have to change ISP to use them, I'm going to change my ISP. Without google I'm out, it has my Docs and my Emails, plus I wouldn't know how to find something online without it (I could, but Bing is suck ass and beyond Yahoo my suckometer stops registering). Even now, if google suggested I switch ISP for better performance, I'd switch ISP. Heck, I even have my DNS through google! I wouldn't have websites without google right now.

bricestacey 17y ago

Another ISP tried to restrict bit torrent traffic and got pages and pages of bad press as a result. That would be Comcast.