4 ms·

I never quite understood what the net neutrality debate was about, having even spent some years at ISP in NYC. So net neutrality is all about giving unlimited

I never quite understood what the net neutrality debate was about, having even spent some years at ISP in NYC. So net neutrality is all about giving unlimited data access to pulic safety workers?

stephengillie 8y ago
A packet is a packet is a packet - bill them all the same, transport them all the same.
LeoPanthera 8y ago
Net Neutrality never applied to cellular connections even when we had it, so it doesn't apply here.
abdullahkhalids 8y ago
People who support net neutrality believe that if private corporations are allowed to bill packets based on destination/origin/content instead of treating them all equally, society would be worse off. Here is a prime example of a corporation being extremely petty in a emergency situation when possibly lives are at risk. To quote: 'Verizon's throttling has everything to do with net neutrality -- it shows that the ISPs will act in their economic interests, even at the expense of public safety," County Counsel James Williams said on behalf of the county and fire department.' How then will a corporation act when the stakes are even lower? Act in public interest or profit seeking?
- orangecat 8y ago
  Verizon's throttling has everything to do with net neutrality And that's just wrong. Verizon throttled the fire department after they hit the specified bandwidth limit, without regard to the content of the traffic. The people who are mad at Verizon are claiming that they should have treated the traffic differently because it was more important, which is exactly the opposite of net neutrality.
  - BigTex420 8y ago
    There isn't (read: shouldn't be) a bandwidth limit on unlimited plans, which the fire department had
    - ComputerGuru 8y ago
      Sure, but global bandwidth limits have nothing to do with net neutrality.
  - pleaseread 8y ago
    What you're saying isn't wrong. Applied to that snippet of the qoute though is wrong. At least semantically it makes it appear as if you read half of a qoute, reacted, and formed your reply based on that reaction.
shmerl 8y ago
It's about preventing ISP from becoming a gatekeeper and abusing its position as a physical network owner to control information flow (which can commonly be used for fleecing the end user, hampering competition, censorship or whatever other sinister purpose). To give a more easy to understand example. Imagine a water network company, which can influence whatever they want by controlling who gets water and how, because water is so vital for everyone. That's abuse of their water network ownership. So it makes perfect sense for such entity to be forced to remain neutral to prevent any potential of such abuse. That's exactly what net neutrality is about.
- Buge 8y ago
  But that doesn't apply to this case, because Verizon was previously being neutral. Verizon didn't cut off the fire department because of the type of data the fire department was using. Verizon shut off the fire department because the fire department hit the cap in the internet plan they signed up for. Verizon is now treating the fire department different from everyone else, so now that Verizon removed the fire department's cap, Verizon could be argued to be no longer neutral.
  - shmerl 8y ago
    I answered in general, not specifically about this case. Data caps are unnecessary anyway, they are an artificial way to force uses to pay more.
    - Buge 8y ago
      tooltalk was expressing confusion about how Net Neutrality relates to this case. How are data caps artificial? Verizon needs to pay money to have capacity in its cell towers. If more people use more data, that means Verizon needs to build more powerful cell towers. By limiting people's data, Verizon doesn't need as many towers. If people pay more, that funds Verizon to build more towers.
      - shmerl 8y ago
ryanlol 8y ago
Net neutrality is about consumers standing up to support their big media overlords against evil internet service providers.
setr 8y ago
In theory, its just that all data should be treated equally, but in practice its whatever you want it to mean (as long you’re talking about ISPs). Like this case.

I never quite understood what the net neutrality debate was about, having even spent some years at ISP in NYC. So net neutrality is all about giving unlimited data access to pulic safety workers?

stephengillie 8y ago

A packet is a packet is a packet - bill them all the same, transport them all the same.

LeoPanthera 8y ago

Net Neutrality never applied to cellular connections even when we had it, so it doesn't apply here.

abdullahkhalids 8y ago

People who support net neutrality believe that if private corporations are allowed to bill packets based on destination/origin/content instead of treating them all equally, society would be worse off. Here is a prime example of a corporation being extremely petty in a emergency situation when possibly lives are at risk. To quote: 'Verizon's throttling has everything to do with net neutrality -- it shows that the ISPs will act in their economic interests, even at the expense of public safety," County Counsel James Williams said on behalf of the county and fire department.' How then will a corporation act when the stakes are even lower? Act in public interest or profit seeking?

orangecat 8y ago
Verizon's throttling has everything to do with net neutrality And that's just wrong. Verizon throttled the fire department after they hit the specified bandwidth limit, without regard to the content of the traffic. The people who are mad at Verizon are claiming that they should have treated the traffic differently because it was more important, which is exactly the opposite of net neutrality.
- BigTex420 8y ago
  There isn't (read: shouldn't be) a bandwidth limit on unlimited plans, which the fire department had
  - ComputerGuru 8y ago
    Sure, but global bandwidth limits have nothing to do with net neutrality.
- pleaseread 8y ago
  What you're saying isn't wrong. Applied to that snippet of the qoute though is wrong. At least semantically it makes it appear as if you read half of a qoute, reacted, and formed your reply based on that reaction.

shmerl 8y ago

It's about preventing ISP from becoming a gatekeeper and abusing its position as a physical network owner to control information flow (which can commonly be used for fleecing the end user, hampering competition, censorship or whatever other sinister purpose). To give a more easy to understand example. Imagine a water network company, which can influence whatever they want by controlling who gets water and how, because water is so vital for everyone. That's abuse of their water network ownership. So it makes perfect sense for such entity to be forced to remain neutral to prevent any potential of such abuse. That's exactly what net neutrality is about.

Buge 8y ago
But that doesn't apply to this case, because Verizon was previously being neutral. Verizon didn't cut off the fire department because of the type of data the fire department was using. Verizon shut off the fire department because the fire department hit the cap in the internet plan they signed up for. Verizon is now treating the fire department different from everyone else, so now that Verizon removed the fire department's cap, Verizon could be argued to be no longer neutral.
- shmerl 8y ago
  I answered in general, not specifically about this case. Data caps are unnecessary anyway, they are an artificial way to force uses to pay more.
  - Buge 8y ago
    tooltalk was expressing confusion about how Net Neutrality relates to this case. How are data caps artificial? Verizon needs to pay money to have capacity in its cell towers. If more people use more data, that means Verizon needs to build more powerful cell towers. By limiting people's data, Verizon doesn't need as many towers. If people pay more, that funds Verizon to build more towers.
    - shmerl 8y ago

ryanlol 8y ago

Net neutrality is about consumers standing up to support their big media overlords against evil internet service providers.

setr 8y ago

In theory, its just that all data should be treated equally, but in practice its whatever you want it to mean (as long you’re talking about ISPs). Like this case.