Net Neutrality...

[HondasTrail]

So I'm doing a term paper for one of my classes on the subject of net neutrality.
I have looked at both sides so far, and now I'm looking for some opinions and thoughts on the subject from you guys. With all that said, Flame on.

BTW I am for net neutrality.

[-=[Juztin]=-]

I'd rather have an Internet with laws that has made it illegal for ISP's to be able to packet shape certain websites/services etc. I believe I should get the full benefit of my internet pipe that I pay for and not be limited by the ISP and their own 'discretion' of what I should be able to do and not do.

[slowfocusguy]

I will kill and die for net neutrality. I'm serious.

[stu]

Could you give some more information? I have an idea what you are talking about based on Justin's post, but I don't know enough about it to give you my uninformed opinion.

[slowfocusguy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYpYbmoVdEc
http://www.savetheinternet.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSU2jtNVO3w

[HondasTrail]

^^ what he said.

[slowfocusguy]

I'm serious people. You hear next to nothing about this, but it's a very important thing when it comes to the internet. Imagine being force to use Yahoo, instead of Google, because Comcast and Yahoo signed a deal.

Everything that makes the Internet great is at stake here. If Net Neutrality is lost, then it'll quickly become like cable T.V.. Were content is chosen for you to browse, and either bloke off competitors websites or limit their connection speed to a crawl.

I say that's a load of BS! Everyone who enjoys the internet will find this as a load of BS! And I swear if these corporations think I'm just gonna stand by and have them shovel a big steaming pile of manure down my throat with this scheme, they may have the Timothy McVeigh giving their doors a very loud knocking.


And if you dont believe me, I'll put a Jihad on you too!

[HondasTrail]

I'm serious people. You hear next to nothing about this, but it's a very important thing when it comes to the internet. Imagine being force to use Yahoo, instead of Google, because Comcast and Yahoo signed a deal.

Everything that makes the Internet great is at stake here. If Net Neutrality is lost, then it'll quickly become like cable T.V.. Were content is chosen for you to browse, and either bloke off competitors websites or limit their connection speed to a crawl.

I say that's a load of BS! Everyone who enjoys the internet will find this as a load of BS! And I swear if these corporations think I'm just gonna stand by and have them shovel a big steaming pile of manure down my throat with this scheme, they may have the Timothy McVeigh giving their doors a very loud knocking.


And if you dont believe me, I'll put a Jihad on you too!

I agree, this is a very serious issue that ISP's and the government are trying to hold under wraps. If I ever lose HAI I'm going to have to shoot somebody.
I'd also like a small business owner's perspective on this whole thing. Brian (HAI Jesus) care to chime in?

[Weston]

Selling the Internet like this not only creates monopolies, but it also has a real potential for censorship. This concept is being presented as a means to improve the Internet by increasing the quality of certain connections, but what that really means is that the sites that don't pay up will only be reached by a clogged and neglected road. Connectivity to such sites can go down entirely and the ISP wont care, since it no longer has to rely on users as the only source of income. Besides, people aren't going to miss what they don't even know about, so ignorance in bliss, and quite profitable too. With a little $$$, you can suppress your competition, no matter if it's a commercial product, open source software, an objective source of news, independant thought, etc. Think about how much the Internet is kicking the ass of the Bush administration and most Republicans... now what if they were to "donate" some serious money to make ensure that their preferred media sources were #1 on the Internet? It sure could change things and affect their elections. I don't think it's hard to agree that politicians would be willing to do such a thing. Heck, this wouldn't even be illegal.

I would picture 802.11 b/g BBS'es popping up everywhere, but the truth is that the American public will only bitch and moan about things, not take action. At the end of they day, they are lazy and will accept mass media, no matter who is behind it. It could be government run and full of lies and propaganda... some will complain, others will just realize that it's pretty much the same as the mass media we have now, but nobody will actually change things.

[-=[Juztin]=-]

The only kind of non net neutrality senario I would accept is one where my packets can all get out the pipe un-shaped, and in the case of 'prioritized' traffic, it will only have higher priority at the queue for my own connection. So all my regular websites and stuff will work just fine, but in the event I want to go to that site that has been 'preferred' by the ISP, it will get just packet prioritization and thus get there for sure, while the rest of my traffic has to contend with each other just like it is now. So the end result would be that I wouldn't notice a preferred site getting better banwidth because I'll be able to do all my normal stuff unlimited.

Kinda hard to explain at the spur of the moment, but I gotta get back to work, I may try to explain it later.

[stu]

I think that this is a dangerous situation. I feel like I'm on the verge of living within the midst of a new age robber barron or something.

Weston, I agree that people will just bend over and let it happen without doing anything, but I think a large part of it, is because they don't know what to do about it. I don't. Tell me now so I can do something at the appropriate time.

Unfortunately, people don't know enough about the internet to realize what is going to happen. Some company wants a packet or two? Sure, I don't see how that's going to effect me anyway.

[Weston-work]

Here's what Ken Salazar says on the matter...

The “network neutrality” principle holds that network owners should remain neutral with respect to the content they carry. Currently, ISP’s can neither discriminate against nor prioritize lawful Internet traffic under the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

You may be interested to learn that the issue of network neutrality has already been addressed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). On August 5, 2005, the FCC released a policy statement entitled “New Principles Preserve and Promote the Open and Interconnected Nature of Public Internet,” which outlined and broadened their support for the concept of network neutrality. Recently, Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) introduced S. 2360, the Internet Non-discrimination Act of 2006, which would prevent ISPs from offering a tiered system of access to the Internet. A similar bill, the Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2006 was also introduced by Senator Snowe and Senator Dorgan. Both of these bills have been referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. There is also discussion regarding the inclusion of network neutrality provisions in S. 2686, the Communications, Consumer's Choice, and Broadband Deployment Act of 2006. Though hearings have been held on this legislation, the bill remains in Committee. It is still unclear if network neutrality provisions will be included in this major legislation.

Though I am not a member of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, please be assured that I will keep your views in mind should legislation concerning network neutrality reach the full Senate. Again, thank you for writing to me about this important issue.

Sincerely,

Ken Salazar
United States Senator

[slowfocusguy]

You want to make this public? We need part vans. Dozens of party vans! Pack with explosives! Then we all martyr ourselves and blow up key AT&T, Comcast, and Bellsouth head quarters. Inside the vans there will be flyers stating the facts about net neutrality!

[-=[Juztin]=-]

The internet aint worth dying over ;)

[slowfocusguy]

You have to crawl before you can run. Save the internet from mega-crops, and slowly bring the rest of the world out from under the corps big hairy feet.

[JL LGT]

Are we really moving forward... or falling back?

[Weston-work]

And here's what Mark Udall said...

Thank you for contacting me about H.R. 5252, the COPE Act, introduced by Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX). I appreciate your taking time to get in touch and I apologize for the delay in my response.



There have been many changes in the telecommunications and cable industry in the ten years since the last major revision of telecommunications law. Today these industries are providing very similar services and the distinctions in the old law are no longer as relevant. As a result, I believe it is time for us to make changes to our telecommunication laws that take into account the technological advances of the industry and the changes in the marketplace.



This bill make some of those needed changes, though I did have some concerns about the ability of cities and municipalities and their constituents to adequately address right-of-way concerns in a timely fashion. I also was concerned that there were not enough protections to ensure network neutrality. For this reason, I supported both network neutrality amendments offered by Reps. Ed Markey (D-MA) and Lamar Smith (R-TX).



There is no doubt that the Internet has revolutionized how we do business, educate, and entertain. As we seek to close the digital divide, we must work to make broadband services more accessible and affordable. This bill encourages more than one Internet provider in a market area which in turn will create competition and lower the cost of cable and Internet services.



Thank you again for contacting me. To do my job well, I need to hear critical feedback from fellow Coloradans. For more information about my positions, please visit my website at www.house.gov/markudall.

[blue]

I think that this is a dangerous situation. I feel like I'm on the verge of living within the midst of a new age robber barron or something.

Weston, I agree that people will just bend over and let it happen without doing anything, but I think a large part of it, is because they don't know what to do about it. I don't. Tell me now so I can do something at the appropriate time.
Unfortunately, people don't know enough about the internet to realize what is going to happen. Some company wants a packet or two? Sure, I don't see how that's going to effect me anyway.

agreed

[slowfocusguy]

The first step is to go to

www.savetheinternet.com

and read up. After that, send a email.

But the most important step is to spread the word. The telecommunication corporations doesnt want people to know about this. Which is why you havent heard about it on the news. If you spread the word, people will listen, and people will take action.

[Loud_Scott]

If you spread the word, people will listen, and people will take action.

bullmotherfuckinshit :bsflag: -- you wanna see how "people take action" take a gander at the statistics of how many people that are "regstered" to vote actually voted today........... i win

[slowfocusguy]

If you tell 1,000,000 people and only 300 of them decide to do something. Is it better then just 1 knowing and trying to do it himself?

[chrisbarnett01]

In 5 years the entire internet will be wireless.

Pick and choose your frequency. No one can control airwaves, they can only control the actual land lines.

If you're really worried, set up your own BBS or something