*quality

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by gwiz665.

Funny how much the Net Neutrality debate seems to look like the Healthcare debate. Freedom-seeking citizens on one side, big companies and lobbyists on the other.

Give it a little time, the big companies and lobbyists will have people saying they're for freedom too, and that Net Neutrality is a secret plot to kill your grandmother.

>> ^NetRunner:
Give it a little time, the big companies and lobbyists will have people saying they're for freedom too, and that Net Neutrality is a secret plot to kill your grandmother.

I've already read someone saying "Net neutrality is what they have in China and North Korea, you know". So yeah, it's getting there.

Free, fast, fair broadband internet? Oh geez. Yet another thing we should let our tax dollars pay for, I suppose?

If you want free, fast, fair broadband internet, it's called the public library. I think this idea that the ISP is going to dictate how NPR.com is going to run its website is a bit of a strawman argument.

somebody slap a *region blocked on it for irony ;-)

Oh common, everyone knows that nothing will happen to net neutrality. Why? Ok, let's pretend some companies switch over to "not neutral" internet. Guess what happens? One company remains "neutral" and EVERYONE switches to that company making the other ones go bankrupt. Not exactly rocket science, is it?

PS: The architect at 1:40.

>> ^fjules:
Oh common, everyone knows that nothing will happen to net neutrality. Why? Ok, let's pretend some companies switch over to "not neutral" internet. Guess what happens? One company remains "neutral" and EVERYONE switches to that company making the other ones go bankrupt. Not exactly rocket science, is it?
PS: The architect at 1:40.


And since most areas only have -one- broadband provider, just who is it that going to remain neutral? Even here in Saint Louis, I only have two providers to choose from (AT&T and Charter)...and given their histories, I think it's pretty obvious that once one of them makes the move to double-dipping, the other will be only seconds behind.

Monopolies don't have to worry about competition...that's kind of implied in the definition.

>> ^fjules:
Oh common, everyone knows that nothing will happen to net neutrality. Why? Ok, let's pretend some companies switch over to "not neutral" internet. Guess what happens? One company remains "neutral" and EVERYONE switches to that company making the other ones go bankrupt. Not exactly rocket science, is it?


This is already happening in Canada. The biggest providers (rogers and bell), have both decided to implement traffic shaping and deep packing scanning in order to stop or severely hinder torrent transfers. They were allowed to do this without even disclosing anything, and in fact, rogers went so far as to not tell anyone they were doing this for years. The government has finally made it a requirement that the major service providers disclose their "traffic management practices" a little more clearly so that more of this stuff doesn't happen. While this doesn't do anything except force ISPs to admit they are doing it, at least it's a start, and these practices are being noticed.

CRTC on ISP traffic management

Tags for this video have been changed from 'open, internet, net, neutrality, freedom, google, skype, application, agnostic' to 'open internet, net neutrality, freedom, google, skype, application agnostic' - edited by lucky760

Net Neutrality is people who don't understand how markets work trying to make unnecessary and cumbersome rules for what they think other people should do. Freedom seeking citizens would never advocate taking away the freedom of other citizens, whether or not they own big companies.

I've just come up with something awesome: Friend Neutrality. People are not allowed to chose who they are friends with anymore, otherwise they will discriminate with prejudice or be too picky. You have to be friends with everybody because every human being is entitled to friendship.

There, I've created a better world.

I like shut the fuck up neutrality. That way, no one can say anything and I can get some sleep.

>> ^gtjwkq:
Net Neutrality is people who don't understand how markets work trying to make unnecessary and cumbersome rules for what they think other people should do. Freedom seeking citizens would never advocate taking away the freedom of other citizens, whether or not they own big companies.
I've just come up with something awesome: Friend Neutrality. People are not allowed to chose who they are friends with anymore, otherwise they will discriminate with prejudice or be too picky. You have to be friends with everybody because every human being is entitled to friendship.
There, I've created a better world.


And people who claim that free markets are the bestest answer to every problem are people who don't understand what a free market entails. You -cannot- have a free market unless everyone involved has complete information about the goods being sold, and there has to be a relatively small barrier to entry into the market. This doesn't even begin to describe the ISP market.

Best of luck trying to find out what the high-usage caps are when you're looking for a new ISP. Virtually all ISP's have them...but none will give you an actual number that will get you shut down.

And for the second point, let's see how much it costs you to run your own set of wires if you care to compete... Those costs are the very arguments used by the phone and cable companies to get the huge government subsidies and monopolies in the first place. There is simply no effective competition in this market...so it simply cannot be free. Anyone who claims otherwise is pushing an ideological stance, not a realistic one.

^ You don't need full information about goods being sold, just punish fraud, so people won't benefit from being deceptive about what they're selling, not to mention the damage it does to their reputation. Your requirement is baseless.

If costs to compete are high, the market's demand for an alternative will eventually make them worthwhile.

When governments are involved, those same phone and cable companies get a free ticket to monopolyland. Who's to blame, big companies or government? It's hard to punish fraud when government is doing the fraud.

Don't "reality x ideology" me, you're speaking out of an ideology as well, and having a poorly formed one doesn't give you any authority over reality.

Another excellent video on net neutrality lives here:
http://videosift.com/video/Best-video-yet-on-Net-Neutrality