FCC to Embrace "Internet Neutrality"

[Cerise]

Since the Internet took root as a mass communications phenomenon in the mid 1990s, a quiet war has raged in Washington over the extent to which the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) would regulate the new medium.

Until, now the Internet has been largely self-regulated, and the FCC has taken a hands-off approach.

But that could change dramatically soon if the Obama administration has its way.

During the weekend, press reports revealed a stunning development: The Obama administration will announce Monday that the FCC would propose new rules to embrace what it calls "Net Neutrality."

On the face of it, Net Neutrality appears to be a popular and fair proposal.

But critics contend that the proposals are nothing more than a backdoor way for the FCC to tighten federal control over the Internet by beginning with the regulation of Internet service providers.

It’ll be like laws covering seat belts, helmets, tobacco, firearms. Just a little, reasonable, sensible regulation now to solve some problem.

Then, every year or two, a little tweak to the regulation to fix something they forgot, or to solve some unforseen problem.

Then they will need to fix a crisis and that will take a big fix. Maybe some breakdown or shortage of critical capacity occurs, then gov. will ride to the rescue!

Government involvement would ensure that nobody's needs are met and freedom is lost.

 

[Mirlyn]

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/posttech/2009/10/att_lobbyist_asks_employees_th.html

 

[Winky]

ayn was right

 

[spike]

Absolute non-discrimination
Columbia Law School professor Tim Wu: "Network neutrality is best defined as a network design principle. The idea is that a maximally useful public information network aspires to treat all content, sites, and platforms equally."[2] According to Imprint Magazine, University of Michigan Law School professor Susan P. Crawford "believes that a neutral Internet must forward packets on a first-come, first served basis, without regard for quality-of-service considerations."[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality#Definitions_of_network_neutrality

Let's just use the facts about net neutrality instead of fear mongering lobbyist backing fear crap?

 

[Winky]

We need the government to run the internet.
At least you are predictable, I'll give you that!

 

[spike]

So the government isn't trying to run the internet.

I suggest you actually find out what net neutrality is before you say weird shit like that.

http://www.google.com/help/netneutrality.html

Any chance of you finding out what it is and discussing that or are you just going to spout off weird nonsensical crap?

It really would be better for the board if we could use facts.

"Today, the neutrality of the Internet is at stake as the broadband carriers want Congress's permission to determine what content gets to you first and fastest. Put simply, this would fundamentally alter the openness of the Internet."

 

[H2O boy]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality#Definitions_of_network_neutrality

Let's just use the facts about net neutrality instead of fear mongering lobbyist backing fear crap?

then posts some facts instead of wiki

 

[H2O boy]

It really would be better for the board if we could use facts.

"Today, the neutrality of the Internet is at stake as the broadband carriers want Congress's permission to determine what content gets to you first and fastest. Put simply, this would fundamentally alter the openness of the Internet."

how many of you trust your congressman to determine what information you need to receive?

how many of you think places that have governments who limit internet access are the best places in the world to live?

apparently about 54% of you do. thats why this imbecil got elected

boy, ron paul looks better every day huh?

 

[MrBishop]

then posts some facts instead of wiki

I suppose that the hundreds of references at the bottom are all fasle?
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-151A1.pdf

 

[spike]

then posts some facts instead of wiki

I was giving you the definition of net neutrality because you seem to have the wrong idea.

how many of you trust your congressman to determine what information you need to receive?

how many of you think places that have governments who limit internet access are the best places in the world to live?

That is not what net neutrality is. Please read what it is before posting.

 

[Mirlyn]

Net Neutrality is not full government hands-on control, its regulated oversight.

Without it, my local ISP (Cox) could filter, throttle, or even block my Vonage account since I'm not using their digital telephone service. With it, an ISP can custom shape available bandwidth to give the average user a better tailored and faster service (prioritize prominent traffic, and discourage heavy users).

Google is of course for it as it protects and secures their product from the delivery service, the middle man, the internet. The one thing Google cannot control over its service. AT&T is against it as they are the middle man, and if push came to shove, they'd like to prioritize their own traffic over another provider.

The goal of net neutrality is to prevent ISPs like Comcast from blocking certain traffic, while you as the customer have no way of opting out of their filtering decisions.

 

[catocom]

the FCC, like most other gov. agencies now, is a bad joke.

 

[Cerise]

Without it, my local ISP (Cox) could filter, throttle, or even block my Vonage account since I'm not using their digital telephone service. With it, an ISP can custom shape available bandwidth to give the average user a better tailored and faster service (prioritize prominent traffic, and discourage heavy users).

Google is of course for it as it protects and secures their product from the delivery service, the middle man, the internet. The one thing Google cannot control over its service. AT&T is against it as they are the middle man, and if push came to shove, they'd like to prioritize their own traffic over another provider.

The goal of net neutrality is to prevent ISPs like Comcast from blocking certain traffic, while you as the customer have no way of opting out of their filtering decisions.

Google sez: Hellz yah!

 

[Mirlyn]

Google sez: Hellz yah!

Difference is, it's a free service with complete exclusivity (you cannot signup for google voice), and providers that you actually pay for the service (skype, vonage, etc) are held by the same standards as the existing phone providers.

The FCC might be at odds with Google, anyway. If that's not enough, don't forget AT&T's already tight ties with/on Apple. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Net neutrality is about ensuring you as the paying consumer have fair and equal access to the entire internet and its associated services, not just what your ISP deems acceptable/profitable.

 

[Winky]

Oh Please

yup we need the government to run the internets

 

[Mirlyn]

Re: Oh Please

yup we need the government to run the internets

Kind of like running back to mama?

 

[Gonz]

More regulations. Governmetn contol. Same thing.

 

[Winky]

One begins to believe nothing
can run without government intervention these days,
perhaps they are right?

Come to think of it name one major human endeavor
that the government hasn’t got it’s dirty paws on today.

 

[Gonz]

Yet they continue to ask for daddies help

 

[spike]

More regulations. Governmetn contol. Same thing.

Damn do just a little research on it before the kneejerk.

"Without it, my local ISP (Cox) could filter, throttle, or even block my Vonage account since I'm not using their digital telephone service."

Is that what you want?

The drama queen thing isn't a logical argument.