arstechnica.com— Network neutrality has lost some steam, but the boilers have returned to full pressure after two senators ask Congress for an investigation. AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast have only themselves to blame.
Oct 29, 2007View in Crawl 4
And who is the provider of the almighty dollar? People. However at least with internet access we do have choice: cable, DSL, satellite. With the government we don't unless you move out of the country. Sorry but I'm against "net neutrality" because government intervention won't stop there...
"Stay Tuned for more thrilling episodes of, Megacorporations digging their own graves!"You know it's gonna happen! When you see the golden parachutes unfolding in the winds, you know that's close to collapse time. CEO's and retroviruses are very closely related that way.
No, no we don't have a choice. There are plenty of places in the U.S. that only one broadband provider gives service to. Well, technically in that situation you do have a choice: broadband from one single company, dial-up, or no internet. I'd hardly consider that a choice. An if you honestly think telcos would provide consumers with a choice to encourage competition you're very naive. Just look at what happened to the oil business before anti-trust laws were setup. One huge company - Standard Oil - that annihilated all competition through shady business practices and eventually controlled the entire market. One thing that always stupefies me about libertarians is that they seem to be in denial about what will inevitably happen to our "free market" with less gov't intervention. People do not have nearly enough power to "vote with their wallets" as you might think.However, I will concede that many many corps manipulate the government to regulate the market in their favor. Like how car companies pushed for many cities to spend less on public transportation. And I'm sure pharmaceutical companies have their hands all over the FDA.
The real news on arsetechnica's site was the spambot story re the Ron Paul for President campaign... Reveals it as BS, spammers with a hidden agenda have blitzed cyberspace with crook emails and video uploads in Ron’s favor, while the mainstream press and no one at all outside of the net has even heard of him. Ron Paul... Ron Schmaul.
^^are you serious? Have the same government that is blocking comedy central enforce net neutrality?If you all think that government regulation of the internet is going to turn up all shiny and smelling like roses you are some seriously mistaken!There are always ways around corporate roadblocks, but go around a government roadblock and it's called ILLEGAL! They will pretend to have your best interests at hand, and turn around and stick it so far up your ass it'll come out your mouth.Let the market regulate the internet, not through laws the government. Don't let the U.S. government touch anything about the internet that they despise because THEY DON'T CONTROL IT!
In my humble opinion, the debate over network neutrality needs more intelligent thought and collaboration amongst its many stakeholders-- netizens, policy makers, technologists, telcos and the like. Wikipedia's definition of network neutrality is starting to provide a more balanced and educated view of the matter. Discrimination of Internet traffic is an unstoppable reality and arguable necessity to support and secure the evolution of the applications running over the Internet (why not discriminate against known and universally recognized "bad traffic".) Although the word "discrimination" means different things to different people especially in the context of net neutrality, traffic discrimination has the ability to both add value to the Internet as a whole and to destroy its tremendous potential. We need to shift to more in-depth discussions in order to encourage policies that will protect the Internet freedoms and opportunities we've come to adore and unleash a more powerful Internet with sustainable business models while protecting us from policies that would harm us. I have discovered for myself that a yes-no view of network neutrality is not the best for anyone. I found the following article very helpful-- <a class="user" href="https://www.dpacket.org/articles/benefits-and-risks-mandating-network-neutrality-and-quest-balanced-policy">https://www.dpacket.org/articles/benefits-and-risk ...</a>
scarycloudsOct 30, 2007
And who is the provider of the almighty dollar? People. However at least with internet access we do have choice: cable, DSL, satellite. With the government we don't unless you move out of the country. Sorry but I'm against "net neutrality" because government intervention won't stop there...
yogioneOct 30, 2007
"Stay Tuned for more thrilling episodes of, Megacorporations digging their own graves!"You know it's gonna happen! When you see the golden parachutes unfolding in the winds, you know that's close to collapse time. CEO's and retroviruses are very closely related that way.
guyenoirOct 30, 2007
No, no we don't have a choice. There are plenty of places in the U.S. that only one broadband provider gives service to. Well, technically in that situation you do have a choice: broadband from one single company, dial-up, or no internet. I'd hardly consider that a choice. An if you honestly think telcos would provide consumers with a choice to encourage competition you're very naive. Just look at what happened to the oil business before anti-trust laws were setup. One huge company - Standard Oil - that annihilated all competition through shady business practices and eventually controlled the entire market. One thing that always stupefies me about libertarians is that they seem to be in denial about what will inevitably happen to our "free market" with less gov't intervention. People do not have nearly enough power to "vote with their wallets" as you might think.However, I will concede that many many corps manipulate the government to regulate the market in their favor. Like how car companies pushed for many cities to spend less on public transportation. And I'm sure pharmaceutical companies have their hands all over the FDA.
Closed AccountNov 1, 2007
The real news on arsetechnica's site was the spambot story re the Ron Paul for President campaign... Reveals it as BS, spammers with a hidden agenda have blitzed cyberspace with crook emails and video uploads in Ron’s favor, while the mainstream press and no one at all outside of the net has even heard of him. Ron Paul... Ron Schmaul.
Closed AccountDec 14, 2007
^^are you serious? Have the same government that is blocking comedy central enforce net neutrality?If you all think that government regulation of the internet is going to turn up all shiny and smelling like roses you are some seriously mistaken!There are always ways around corporate roadblocks, but go around a government roadblock and it's called ILLEGAL! They will pretend to have your best interests at hand, and turn around and stick it so far up your ass it'll come out your mouth.Let the market regulate the internet, not through laws the government. Don't let the U.S. government touch anything about the internet that they despise because THEY DON'T CONTROL IT!
liquidassets5Dec 31, 2007
In my humble opinion, the debate over network neutrality needs more intelligent thought and collaboration amongst its many stakeholders-- netizens, policy makers, technologists, telcos and the like. Wikipedia's definition of network neutrality is starting to provide a more balanced and educated view of the matter. Discrimination of Internet traffic is an unstoppable reality and arguable necessity to support and secure the evolution of the applications running over the Internet (why not discriminate against known and universally recognized "bad traffic".) Although the word "discrimination" means different things to different people especially in the context of net neutrality, traffic discrimination has the ability to both add value to the Internet as a whole and to destroy its tremendous potential. We need to shift to more in-depth discussions in order to encourage policies that will protect the Internet freedoms and opportunities we've come to adore and unleash a more powerful Internet with sustainable business models while protecting us from policies that would harm us. I have discovered for myself that a yes-no view of network neutrality is not the best for anyone. I found the following article very helpful-- <a class="user" href="https://www.dpacket.org/articles/benefits-and-risks-mandating-network-neutrality-and-quest-balanced-policy">https://www.dpacket.org/articles/benefits-and-risk ...</a>