Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Net neutrality is dead. Bow to Comcast and Verizon, your overlords (AKA DOOOOOM)

<< < (3/5) > >>

Renegade:
...I'm going to calm down.
-wraith808 (January 15, 2014, 08:07 PM)
--- End quote ---

No. Don't calm down. Get mad. Get real mad.



Something like that.

Stoic Joker:
...AAaanndd from the "let's take it straight to the basement" department, ladies and gentleman I give you the opposing view:

http://www.zdnet.com/i-hope-net-neutrality-is-really-dead-this-time-7000025167/

 :P
-Edvard (January 15, 2014, 08:03 PM)
--- End quote ---

I think the only thing that that actually proves is that it is indeed "humanly" possible to swallow the corporate sausage sideways. :-\

Now all they have to do is get the internet chopped up into nice cleanly packaged "entertainment" channels like cable TV and we can all go back to using ham radio and the library for our information sources. Well... At least the segment of the populace that hasn't devolved into a palpitating set of media overloaded eyeballs can.

SeraphimLabs:
Tbh I have to agree partially with both sides in this.

While the FCC very much should pass regulations prohibiting ISPs from charging end-users additional fees to access certain services, at the same time they cannot reap the benefits of CDN technology and the efficiency gains that introduces while staying perfectly neutral.

Thus, service providers are allowed to pay other service providers for premium placements, but providers to end users cannot restrict or otherwise paywall what is available to their users.

Kind of a compromise there, best of both worlds.

wraith808:
I think that what comcast is doing with netflix/xbox currently is fine, in regards to making it so that if you access netflix from your xbox then it doesn't count against your cap.  It's good for the end user, and the end user isn't paying for the privilege.  But when you get into a la carte services to do the same and it be the consumer that has to pay for it?  Or giving them the ability to throttle individual services? 

That is just ripe for abuse.  And when you get down to it, the providers want to make money.  That's their business.

Stoic Joker:
Or giving them the ability to throttle individual services?-wraith808 (January 16, 2014, 04:08 PM)
--- End quote ---
More specifically giving them the ability to cripple a service, just because it was decided that it was bad.

All this does is fast track the ability of mega corporations to crush anything they perceive as a "threat" to their profits and/or dominance. Net neutrality is about allowing all 65536 of the available ports in the TCP/IP stack free and equal time. All the crap about needing to prioritize the point to point communications via traffic shaping across the backbone is just posturing bullshit while that try like dancing monkey hell to cover the simple fact that they oversold their infrastructure yet again.

They want to pretend they can sell every clown in town a 50+MB pipe and then on a holiday weekend when there's nothing on TV and folks decide to Netflix/hulu/etc a movie to keep the kids still, they want to blame pirates of aliens of something for the fact that the system can't actually handle that kind of peak load. All because some twink in accounting didn't believe that that many people might actually try to do X at the same time.

So sure piss down my back and tell me it's raining. They've been trying to figure out how to turn the internet into the same ala carte nightmare since the original fad started to catch on.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page