6 ms·

Now that it's fully legal for ISPs to throttle Netflix, Google, et al (thanks, Verizon) and extort money from them in return for giving customers the bandwidth

Now that it's fully legal for ISPs to throttle Netflix, Google, et al (thanks, Verizon) and extort money from them in return for giving customers the bandwidth they pay for, I think it's time for all the major players to track performance on the networks and call out the throttlers with a message right over the video stream on their website and in-app (Android, iOS, Xbox, etc). SO, when you use TWC and are getting only 60k as are all your neighbors, Google can pop a warning up on your screen that your connection is slow and the support number for your provider. This will result in lots of angry customers calling their providers about the issue, and get them to be angry at the right people.

zackmorris 13y ago
Also net neutrality was a key barrier to ad hoc and distributed/self organizing networks. Once people perceive that they are not guaranteed to get what they paid for, there will be a race to the bottom to find alternatives. The ISPs killed the goose that laid the golden egg and don't even know it yet.
- guelo 13y ago
  This doesn't ring true. Mesh-type networks fail for many reasons. Mainly, nobody seems to have found a good use for them, especially with everybody walking around with 4G hotspots nowadays. Seems very doubtful that the FCC would have gotten involved regulating some fledgling community network. Can you provide any evidence that an adhoc network was ever regulated under network neutrality rules?
  - dangrossman 13y ago
    I don't think that's what he's saying. He's saying that ad hoc networks never took off because normal ISPs were good enough. Normal ISPs were good enough because of net neutrality. Now that net neutrality no longer forces ISPs to provide equal service levels for all data someone may want to access, there's an opening for ad hoc networks to fill.
_mulder_ 13y ago
Just to play devils advocate here, but has anyone fully considered the impact on ISPs that this massive increase in demand is having on them. Especially the hated Cable companies who are seeing customers turn their backs on their own TV products whilst shouting and demanding more and more bandwidth so they can watch (and pay instead) NetFlix et al. NetFlix and YouTube do not pay the ISPs anything. ISPs are not some cloud based company selling software, they are a utility company with Billions of $$ of investment in physical cables spanning every street in every country. In nearly every instance, the initial investment in this infrastructure was for a completely different technology (telephone or TV) from a time way before internet. The industry is now at a point where demand for bandwidth is simply outpacing technological innovation and these networks can't take the strain. Think about the work involved in doubling Broadband speeds over say 2-3 years, in line with demand. In the past this involved installing some new equipment in the central office or exchange. Then this wasn't enough so the equipment had to be installed in the street, costly, especially as the number required was so much higher. Now we're at the point where the copper Coax or phone-line can't physically do the job anymore and it needs replacing, ideally with Fibre. Imagine the work and cost involved in doing this task. It's a hugely labour intensive task to dig up every street and there are many layers of red-tape and bureaucracy that simply weren't there during the initial build out. Once you've done that, you then need to buy vast amounts of brand new equipment and back-office software to run these new systems, plus hire in a load of new talent. Now imagine doing this for every single home in the US or Europe (not just Kansas). Now imagine doing this without increasing your prices. Now imagine doing this whilst some key revenue streams are also being taken away from you. Then think about the payback period on this investment... how long will all that Fibre even be used before wireless speeds increase and half your customer base decide they don't even want a fixed line anymore because they can get 1Gbps on their mobile? That 4K Video stream is still only 30mbps! 10 years perhaps? I'm not surprised the ISPs are fighting back, they're putting in all the money and taking all of the risk for little to no reward. Now... to speak my own mind. The sooner the old guard realise their time is up and adapt to fit the new demand the better, for customers and for the ISPs. Cable companies in particular have a very difficult time coming to terms with the fact that they're now just a data pipe. People don't want to buy their TV or their programming. People want internet and on the internet you can get everything, including TV and Movies. ISPs need to start investing in their networks even if it means we have to pay a bit more, because it won't come cheap, and stop pretending they're still relevant. But throttling the guy selling the better widget is just petty and benefits no-one.

zackmorris 13y ago

Also net neutrality was a key barrier to ad hoc and distributed/self organizing networks. Once people perceive that they are not guaranteed to get what they paid for, there will be a race to the bottom to find alternatives. The ISPs killed the goose that laid the golden egg and don't even know it yet.

guelo 13y ago
This doesn't ring true. Mesh-type networks fail for many reasons. Mainly, nobody seems to have found a good use for them, especially with everybody walking around with 4G hotspots nowadays. Seems very doubtful that the FCC would have gotten involved regulating some fledgling community network. Can you provide any evidence that an adhoc network was ever regulated under network neutrality rules?
- dangrossman 13y ago
  I don't think that's what he's saying. He's saying that ad hoc networks never took off because normal ISPs were good enough. Normal ISPs were good enough because of net neutrality. Now that net neutrality no longer forces ISPs to provide equal service levels for all data someone may want to access, there's an opening for ad hoc networks to fill.

_mulder_ 13y ago

Just to play devils advocate here, but has anyone fully considered the impact on ISPs that this massive increase in demand is having on them. Especially the hated Cable companies who are seeing customers turn their backs on their own TV products whilst shouting and demanding more and more bandwidth so they can watch (and pay instead) NetFlix et al. NetFlix and YouTube do not pay the ISPs anything. ISPs are not some cloud based company selling software, they are a utility company with Billions of $$ of investment in physical cables spanning every street in every country. In nearly every instance, the initial investment in this infrastructure was for a completely different technology (telephone or TV) from a time way before internet. The industry is now at a point where demand for bandwidth is simply outpacing technological innovation and these networks can't take the strain. Think about the work involved in doubling Broadband speeds over say 2-3 years, in line with demand. In the past this involved installing some new equipment in the central office or exchange. Then this wasn't enough so the equipment had to be installed in the street, costly, especially as the number required was so much higher. Now we're at the point where the copper Coax or phone-line can't physically do the job anymore and it needs replacing, ideally with Fibre. Imagine the work and cost involved in doing this task. It's a hugely labour intensive task to dig up every street and there are many layers of red-tape and bureaucracy that simply weren't there during the initial build out. Once you've done that, you then need to buy vast amounts of brand new equipment and back-office software to run these new systems, plus hire in a load of new talent. Now imagine doing this for every single home in the US or Europe (not just Kansas). Now imagine doing this without increasing your prices. Now imagine doing this whilst some key revenue streams are also being taken away from you. Then think about the payback period on this investment... how long will all that Fibre even be used before wireless speeds increase and half your customer base decide they don't even want a fixed line anymore because they can get 1Gbps on their mobile? That 4K Video stream is still only 30mbps! 10 years perhaps? I'm not surprised the ISPs are fighting back, they're putting in all the money and taking all of the risk for little to no reward. Now... to speak my own mind. The sooner the old guard realise their time is up and adapt to fit the new demand the better, for customers and for the ISPs. Cable companies in particular have a very difficult time coming to terms with the fact that they're now just a data pipe. People don't want to buy their TV or their programming. People want internet and on the internet you can get everything, including TV and Movies. ISPs need to start investing in their networks even if it means we have to pay a bit more, because it won't come cheap, and stop pretending they're still relevant. But throttling the guy selling the better widget is just petty and benefits no-one.