Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

On the Web: Google net neutrality stance gives Net’s future to corporations

<< < (2/8) > >>

rgdot:
This may sound bad but here goes....if anybody believes a slogan then he/she is part of the problem.

I like gmail and a couple of other google products but I always know that when a company, a big company, reaches IPO or public and therefore profit phase it's done. Don't be surprised to see google backtrack only publicly to appease some of the don't be evil believers but at the end of the day profit driven is profit driven. If you really need to use these products you just have to make your judgment based on the old 'lesser of evils' saying.

JavaJones:
I'm sorry, but Google is - so far - nowhere near as "evil" as Verizon and the other carriers. Google is trying to secure *their* future, because they know the carriers will constantly threaten it. If net neutrality weren't such a controversial issue, if we could truly get a "neutral" Internet, including wireless spectrum, I don't see how Google would have a problem with it. Do you think the wireless spectrum exclusion clause in the *suggested approach* is Google's idea? Hmm, let's think what other major party to the agreement might be interested in such a thing...

Remember too, this is just a "suggestion" to those who actually have the power to legislate. We'll see where it goes from here. But it's definitely disappointing to see Google compromising this much.

- Oshyan

J-Mac:
So who is actually surprised by this?

Jim

rgdot:
@JavaJones Talking in general here...FCC's power is much vaguer than any legislation type of thing. If you are unsatisfied with those you voted for imagine how you must feel about appointees or whatever those people at the FCC are called. Google doesn't have to be as evil as anybody, they have lots of power and by sitting down with a major carrier to 'suggest' something that will affect millions they are being evil enough.

JavaJones:
What I'm saying is I don't think Google suggested it. Surely Verizon did. Google has nothing to gain from this. Google is *agreeing* to it, and worse they are *endorsing* it, but why would you think they'd *suggest* it? You're making it sound like Verizon was convinced by Google to make wireless separate. The only way that seems reasonable is if Verizon was totally against net neutrality regulation entirely, whether wireless or wired, and now they're just focusing on wireless, which is still an improvement but bad.

- Oshyan

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page