[BC] The "Net Neutrality" proper position to have ??

[Dana Puopolo]

Net neutrality is about this-and much more. To better understand it, it's a
good idea to go over its history. 

First there were dire predictions about "The Exaflood" which was that the
Internet would eventually grind to a halt if everyone wasn't put on metered
plans. This theory has been debunked for many years by experts in objective
research and studios-but it still rears it's ugly head from time to
time-usually by a (clueless) Congressman or Senator, under the assumption that
all this extra traffic was the result of illegal downloading.

Next, the Chariman of AT&T came out and stated that he expected big companies
like Google to pay HIM for the Internet traffic that AT&T delivers to
YOU-their customer.  In essence he wanted AT&T to be paid TWICE-once by you to
get access to the Internet and a second time by the sites you visit there. The
implication was that sites that did this would get "express lane"
treatment-while the rest would get 'slow boat to China' treatment.

Then, companies like Comcast and Cox began using 'traffic management'
equipment. This equipment (Sandvine) actually inspected each packet and
determined what it was doing-and if certain types were present. slowed down
your your connection. This "deep packet inspection" was determined by the FCC
to essentially be an invasion of privacy, and Comcast for a little slap on the
wrist. Comcast sued in court-and the court held that Comcast could do whatever
it wanted to over its own lines-and to HELL with its paying customers! This
freaked out the FCC-after all, they had given big cable and telco the candy
store already-and now they wanted even more!

So now we are at a crossroads. Comcast dropped management mainly because it
was unpopular and now has a 250 gB cap. Some others (Time Warner Roadrunner)
have been experimenting with caps as low as 40 gB-and the wireless companies
have all pretty much settled on a 5 gB cap. The courts have tied the FCC's
hands and now they are looking to Congress for help on this issue-something
that the new Tea Baggers are not likely to do.
So, Internet consumers, expect to get screwed even more the next few years.
There's a reason why the USA is 17th in Internet deployment-and pays some of
the highest prices in the world for the slowest speeds. It's Congress and the
FCC banding over to the slush $$ that big cable and telco throw at them. Once
again, we have the best government that (corporate) money can buy....

-D

From: "Gary Glaenzer" <glaenzer at frontier.com>

From: "wpio fm 89.3" <wpio at gate.net>

> What do broadcasters make of net-neutrality, a fast track FCC item
> according to Drudge.  Or, should broadcasters even care about this item.

well, as I understand it, all users will have the same download speed by 
decree

that means that YOUR download speed will be no faster than your Grandma in 
Wakita, OK, who uses her comp only on Saturday morning to e-mail Aunt Helen 
in Beulah, ND

never mind that she never uses the bandwidth, she MUST have it sitting there

so either:

1) providers have to MASSIVELY over-build to provide heavy users with 
sufficient BW, for which you will pay

or

2) you must make do with sucky service

the proper position, in my opinion, is not just 'no', but 'H*LL NO!!!'

just my $ 0.02, YMMV

G