7 ms·

There isn't a new level playing field coming along anytime soon. The internet was the pinnacle of a series of benign regulatory choices, clear and present dang

There isn't a new level playing field coming along anytime soon. The internet was the pinnacle of a series of benign regulatory choices, clear and present dangers of older models being avoided, and lack of incumbent awareness, and adaptation. This era has ended, we are in the end game, and how America fights and sets an example here, <despite> all odds, will influence how this resource gets used for generations. This is not a fight you can give up.

djsumdog 10y ago
I use to have this notion too, but keep in mind that the Internet was started as a military project. The fact that it ended up being commandeered by large conglomerates shouldn't really be surprising. There are countries in Europe, the South Pacific, et. al. where carriers offer "free social" where they don't charge for Facebook and Twitter. Wikiepdia is offered for free by some African carriers; which allows them to also benefit from a lack of real network-neutrality. When it comes to media and freedom vs industry, I think this video from the mid-2000s explains the situation best (in terms of network neutrality): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66PbSzwnLes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66PbSzwnLes
- Retra 10y ago
  It wasn't a military project any more than the radio or telephone were. Or railroads and highways.
  - timthorn 10y ago
    Radio, telephone and trains were all private inventions, developed for money. The Internet was explicitly not commercial for many years.
    - Retra 10y ago
      So? The outcome of wars are almost entirely decided on the basis of logistic and communications systems. It's hardly a relevant matter to point out that research into communications and logistics has military value and would originate from military funding. This is not something one needs to 'keep in mind' to conclude that commercial entities would end up controlling and administering it.
    - westbywest 10y ago
      FWIW, Samuel Morse obtained a $30,000 grant from Congress in 1843 to build an experimental telegraph line between Baltimore and Washington.
  - Inconel 10y ago
    Slightly off topic but wasn't the original purpose of the interstate system to be able to move war materiel around the country by land efficiently?
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - pc86 10y ago
      And to land bombers, if memory serves.
      - WorldMaker 10y ago
        This was not a goal of the American Interstate system: http://www.snopes.com/autos/law/airstrip.asp http://www.snopes.com/autos/law/airstrip.asp
- ionised 10y ago
  The internet was but the World Wide Web was not.
intrasight 10y ago
Well stated and I very much agree. We got the benefits of an unregulated internet largely by chance. Now the cake is baked and being sliced up. One positive thing I see happening is some small, agile companies rolling out fiber broadband. Ting comes to mind but there are others for sure.
sounds 10y ago
Are you willing to drop AT&T and Verizon, regardless of the cost? That also means dropping the MVNO's who just resell AT&T and Verizon's capacity at a lower price. You may have to build your own last mile internet infrastructure. (See comments below about mesh networking) I assume T-Mobile will join in on this zero-rating of data, based on their "all you can eat" promotion. You may not be able to use a cell phone in the US. Boycotts do get the attention of the company, but it's going to take a long time and a lot of hard, hard work.
- intended 10y ago
  It's not just America - in India, we've recently fought this battle with Facebook (which magically doesn't push for zero rating in America.) and telcos. It's hard and they are coming for round 2 and round 3. But it must be fought. The fact that America fought for it under wheeler and the previous administration was at the very least an example to point out the hypocrisy of Facebook, and an example of the country which created the internet valuing net neutrality. Maybe/perhaps Coders/computer scientists/computer engineers need a body to govern ethics, and that body needs to make the moral and clear call on net neutrality.

djsumdog 10y ago

I use to have this notion too, but keep in mind that the Internet was started as a military project. The fact that it ended up being commandeered by large conglomerates shouldn't really be surprising. There are countries in Europe, the South Pacific, et. al. where carriers offer "free social" where they don't charge for Facebook and Twitter. Wikiepdia is offered for free by some African carriers; which allows them to also benefit from a lack of real network-neutrality. When it comes to media and freedom vs industry, I think this video from the mid-2000s explains the situation best (in terms of network neutrality): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66PbSzwnLes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66PbSzwnLes

Retra 10y ago
It wasn't a military project any more than the radio or telephone were. Or railroads and highways.
- timthorn 10y ago
  Radio, telephone and trains were all private inventions, developed for money. The Internet was explicitly not commercial for many years.
  - Retra 10y ago
    So? The outcome of wars are almost entirely decided on the basis of logistic and communications systems. It's hardly a relevant matter to point out that research into communications and logistics has military value and would originate from military funding. This is not something one needs to 'keep in mind' to conclude that commercial entities would end up controlling and administering it.
  - westbywest 10y ago
    FWIW, Samuel Morse obtained a $30,000 grant from Congress in 1843 to build an experimental telegraph line between Baltimore and Washington.
- Inconel 10y ago
  Slightly off topic but wasn't the original purpose of the interstate system to be able to move war materiel around the country by land efficiently?
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - pc86 10y ago
    And to land bombers, if memory serves.
    - WorldMaker 10y ago
      This was not a goal of the American Interstate system: http://www.snopes.com/autos/law/airstrip.asp http://www.snopes.com/autos/law/airstrip.asp
ionised 10y ago
The internet was but the World Wide Web was not.

intrasight 10y ago

Well stated and I very much agree. We got the benefits of an unregulated internet largely by chance. Now the cake is baked and being sliced up. One positive thing I see happening is some small, agile companies rolling out fiber broadband. Ting comes to mind but there are others for sure.

sounds 10y ago

Are you willing to drop AT&T and Verizon, regardless of the cost? That also means dropping the MVNO's who just resell AT&T and Verizon's capacity at a lower price. You may have to build your own last mile internet infrastructure. (See comments below about mesh networking) I assume T-Mobile will join in on this zero-rating of data, based on their "all you can eat" promotion. You may not be able to use a cell phone in the US. Boycotts do get the attention of the company, but it's going to take a long time and a lot of hard, hard work.

intended 10y ago
It's not just America - in India, we've recently fought this battle with Facebook (which magically doesn't push for zero rating in America.) and telcos. It's hard and they are coming for round 2 and round 3. But it must be fought. The fact that America fought for it under wheeler and the previous administration was at the very least an example to point out the hypocrisy of Facebook, and an example of the country which created the internet valuing net neutrality. Maybe/perhaps Coders/computer scientists/computer engineers need a body to govern ethics, and that body needs to make the moral and clear call on net neutrality.