net neutrality
June-21st-2006, 02:34 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: DC metro area
Posts: 866
net neutrality
there is a lot of talk about "net neutrality" going on. its an issue that not many people know about, but almost all of us will be affected.
basically speaking, the telephone and cable companies that provide over 90% of the internet access in this country want to charge more for more bandwidth. the overhead of operating all the equipment to provide you high-speed video streaming, VOIP, and other broadband services plays greatly into this equation. if you know anything about newspapers or magazines, subscriptions alone don't cover the whole cost of the paper you hold in your hands. ISPs want to charge more for the premo stuff; "pay-as-you-play" they call it, and it makes perfect sense. the idea of a faster tier of service is nothing new, the Internet2 has been a pet project of universities and corporations alike for quite some time.
the people most affected will probably be the content providers. vonage will have to up their budget on bandwidth and so will google for their video section. these are companies and people who can afford high priced lines to give their customers the performance they desire. but the fear is that the average home user will be the ultimate loser. small upstart companies that cannot afford the bandwidth will have an uneven playing field and also feel the negative effects. when Gi gets pwn'd on a mazda forum, the admins will find themselves limiting the open communication & free speech that was once the backbone for growth of a community of car lovers.
so what do we do? as a consumer you can write or call to your telephone or cable companies and let them know how you feel. if you are against what they are doing, sympathize with their cause but present your case strongly and firmly. as a tax payer and voter write or call your congressman or woman. butter them up with how you're a proud voter and don't forget to present your case strongly and firmly.
in the end, i haven't formed an opinion quite yet. let's say you sat down to watch a free movie in a nice theater. while it was free, somebody had to pay for the rights, the rental of space, the equipment, etc. and although you may not be thinking it, the people up in the projector booth probably are. but i wouldn't want to give up the opportunity to watch a free movie every once in a while. what do you all think?
-meGrimlock
basically speaking, the telephone and cable companies that provide over 90% of the internet access in this country want to charge more for more bandwidth. the overhead of operating all the equipment to provide you high-speed video streaming, VOIP, and other broadband services plays greatly into this equation. if you know anything about newspapers or magazines, subscriptions alone don't cover the whole cost of the paper you hold in your hands. ISPs want to charge more for the premo stuff; "pay-as-you-play" they call it, and it makes perfect sense. the idea of a faster tier of service is nothing new, the Internet2 has been a pet project of universities and corporations alike for quite some time.
the people most affected will probably be the content providers. vonage will have to up their budget on bandwidth and so will google for their video section. these are companies and people who can afford high priced lines to give their customers the performance they desire. but the fear is that the average home user will be the ultimate loser. small upstart companies that cannot afford the bandwidth will have an uneven playing field and also feel the negative effects. when Gi gets pwn'd on a mazda forum, the admins will find themselves limiting the open communication & free speech that was once the backbone for growth of a community of car lovers.
so what do we do? as a consumer you can write or call to your telephone or cable companies and let them know how you feel. if you are against what they are doing, sympathize with their cause but present your case strongly and firmly. as a tax payer and voter write or call your congressman or woman. butter them up with how you're a proud voter and don't forget to present your case strongly and firmly.
in the end, i haven't formed an opinion quite yet. let's say you sat down to watch a free movie in a nice theater. while it was free, somebody had to pay for the rights, the rental of space, the equipment, etc. and although you may not be thinking it, the people up in the projector booth probably are. but i wouldn't want to give up the opportunity to watch a free movie every once in a while. what do you all think?
-meGrimlock
June-21st-2006, 10:35 PM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: DAllas, PA
Posts: 502
So basically you are saying, as the internet grows more bandwidth dependant, the more prices for ISP's are going to go up?
Makes perfect sense I suppose, But i don't believe in fighting big companies, waste of time if you ask me.
Makes perfect sense I suppose, But i don't believe in fighting big companies, waste of time if you ask me.
June-21st-2006, 11:55 PM
#3
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: DC metro area
Posts: 866
i think people are talking about 2 tiers of service. one for hi speed content providers and one for low speed. they fear this will retard the growth and use of the internet, and will benefit only ISPs and companies with big pockets.
June-22nd-2006, 03:07 PM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: DAllas, PA
Posts: 502
THey already have different levels of service, for instance I have normal DSL which runs 1500kb/s down and 380 up, where as my local gaming center has the same provider but they have parrallel 3000 down and 800 up.
I don't understand :P
I don't understand :P
June-23rd-2006, 09:39 PM
#5
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: DC metro area
Posts: 866
i never said i get it either, but its not so much that you have to pay more for more internet speed, but the ISP will prioritize speed for higher paying customers (content/service providers), and the lower paying customers get the bottom of the bandwidth--an unlevel playing field.
lets say you have comcast internet, google doesnt have to pay comcast a cent for you to download a google video and its streaming at your pc at hi speeds. and you dont have to pay anything extra for downloading email vs. downloading streaming movies.
the people who are for net neutrality say that if the ISPs have their way, there may see less growth and less choices in internet offerings and content. but its also important that the companies that are the backbone of the internet be able to provide those offerings.
lets say you have comcast internet, google doesnt have to pay comcast a cent for you to download a google video and its streaming at your pc at hi speeds. and you dont have to pay anything extra for downloading email vs. downloading streaming movies.
the people who are for net neutrality say that if the ISPs have their way, there may see less growth and less choices in internet offerings and content. but its also important that the companies that are the backbone of the internet be able to provide those offerings.
July-15th-2006, 08:36 PM
#7
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: DC metro area
Posts: 866
July-22nd-2006, 06:56 PM
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Hermosillo Sonora Mexico
Posts: 230
The "PC guy"
Last edited by DEm; July-22nd-2006 at 07:01 PM.