Discussion World Forum  


Go Back   Discussion World Forum > Discussion Forums > Computers & Technology

Computers & Technology Computer issues, hardware, software, internet and new technologies.

View Poll Results: Do you support net neutrality as a goal?
Yes - the net should remain neutral 13 86.67%
No - private companies can do whatever they like to make profits 1 6.67%
I don't know - this topic is very complicated 1 6.67%
I just like voting in polls 0 0%
Voters: 15. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old Sep 22nd 2009, 06:48 PM
The Drunk Guy's Avatar
The Drunk Guy The Drunk Guy is offline
Bad Motherfucker
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: 'Round back
Posts: 2,339
Default Re: Net Neutrality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael View Post
This kind of thing can never be stopped or eliminated.

The issue would be if your ISP (which owns CNN for example) makes it very difficult for you to access MSNBC or Fox's site or to seeks to slow that traffic to a crawl - but give you above average speeds to CNN's site (because they own it).

Obviously search engines will favor those who advertise with them. That's part of their business model and has been all along. Besides, search engines are just a 'feature' on the internet that one can do without. ISP's control access points - that is of critical imporance and cannot be avoided except by avoiding the net itself.
I understand that. I'm simply referring to how internet-related industries are already showing signs of information distortion. Portals to information will eventually skew the view because it is more cost-efficient to do so.
__________________
Vae, puto deus fio...
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old Sep 22nd 2009, 08:08 PM
Daktoria's Avatar
Daktoria Daktoria is offline
World Citizen
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 721
Default Re: Net Neutrality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael View Post
This doesn't match up with the way the internet is constructed.

Businesses who invest in the internet, create infrastructure that "attaches" to the net.

Private companies only own the parts of the internet that interest themselves or serve their profit interests. One could shut down all such privately owned infrastructure and the internet would still be there and would still function (the core of the backbone is a bunch of universities all hooked up around the globe).

Net neutrality doesn't involve any expropriation of anything by anyone. Indeed, quite the opposite - what net neutrality does is prevent private interests from expropriating the public asset of the internet for their own private purposes (which is what they are seeking to do which is why opposition has arisen around the principle of "net neutrality").

No one is forcing Comcast to share their resources with the internet. Comast can take their ball and go home if they like. But if they want to plug into the net for their own profit-seeking motives, that's fine, but they ought not to be given the legal right to expropriate net assets for their own profit. That's what the principle of net neutrality seeks to prevent. The goal is to maintain an open market.
This was about licensing, not ownership, licenses which are guaranteed rights, and if those rights are revoked or modified over time, then the license holders are being coerced through deception similarly to if a driver on the streets had to deal with different laws whenever he went on the road - he wouldn't have a reliable basis for scheduling his itinerary, so the roads usage would become useless such that all spending, endogenous and exogenous alike, would be vain.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old Sep 22nd 2009, 08:36 PM
Daktoria's Avatar
Daktoria Daktoria is offline
World Citizen
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 721
Default Re: Net Neutrality

^
Same goes for anyone who builds say a bridge or a gas station or any other service that supports or gives incentive for drivers' access to the road (since that's what an ISP or database owner really does, provide access or give incentive for access).
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old Sep 23rd 2009, 11:55 AM
Daktoria's Avatar
Daktoria Daktoria is offline
World Citizen
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 721
Default Re: Net Neutrality

Or zoning laws, w/e. The point is if the rules change since the time people made initial investments without their approval, then there's theft. Even if excessive compensation is made under the guise of imminent domain, it's still theft if the investor is forced to sell because a sovereign (democratic or not) wants to do so (especially in order to feel good and swing its power around).

What's really funny about this though (both here and in general when I talk about it IRL) is that the people who want network neutrality are advocates for pragmatism whereas the practitioners of traffic discrimination do so to optimize competitiveness and information flow, both of which are practical goals in themselves.

However it's possible to believe anyone supporting net neutrality as being honest, I don't know, but until it's shown that they're standing up for something beyond letting the mob feel good, I won't give them the benefit of the doubt (especially as advocates of liberalism when power pursuit for the sake of feeling good is quintessential realpolitik). There is the argument that ISPs offer contracts to consumers, contracts which consumers expect to be upheld, but those contracts have periodic time limits, and once the time limits are over, it's not coercive to change the contract terms. Heck, obligating the contract offerers to uphold the same terms beyond time limits would qualify as coercion instead since the offerers' autonomies are being disrespected.

I guess net neutrality is just yet another example of how populism is more conservative than anything due to its demands for stability which coincide with a demand for predictable order, particularly under the guise of a national interest such that culture's direction under popular sovereignty defines morality. How unfortunate it is then that this is a fake version of conservatism (as well as liberalism) since even more fundamental than the rule of order is the rule of law, rule of law which, if nothing else, is anything different from the rule of man (IOW a transcendental [set of] principle[s]).

Last edited by Daktoria; Sep 23rd 2009 at 12:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old Sep 23rd 2009, 01:15 PM
Michael's Avatar
Michael Michael is offline
Administrator
Herder of Cats
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14,835
Default Re: Net Neutrality

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Drunk Guy View Post
I understand that. I'm simply referring to how internet-related industries are already showing signs of information distortion. Portals to information will eventually skew the view because it is more cost-efficient to do so.
I think it is very important to draw this distinction here.

Sure private corporations are going to try to make profits by distorting information. That's the nature of a private marketplace. While I might not like that, I think any possible cure is worse than the disease.

The same cannot be said about access to the network. This is where the issue is highly relevant. The ISP's have the potential power to directly control your access to the entire net. They can potentially use this gate-keeper position to further their net-content businesses and/or to censor information they don't like (such as their content-competition).

This is very similar to the old telecom dispute from the 1980s when the monopoly telephone companies would use massive profits from long distance calls to cross-subsidize local service in order to keep out any competition for the local service (which needed to be protected because it was the source of massively profitable long distance calling).

In order for actual market competition to occur in either the long distance telephone service market or the local telephone service market, limits had to be placed upon the monopoly telephone companies.

In that case, government intervention into the telephone marketplace was necessary to create the conditions for market competition. Without government regulation, there would be no competition in the telephone marketplace.

ISP's must be prevented from playing a similar game here with the internet. Their position as gatekeepers to the system for consumers is critical - and thus represents a public interest.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old Sep 23rd 2009, 01:24 PM
Michael's Avatar
Michael Michael is offline
Administrator
Herder of Cats
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14,835
Default Re: Net Neutrality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daktoria View Post
This was about licensing, not ownership, licenses which are guaranteed rights, and if those rights are revoked or modified over time, then the license holders are being coerced through deception similarly to if a driver on the streets had to deal with different laws whenever he went on the road - he wouldn't have a reliable basis for scheduling his itinerary, so the roads usage would become useless such that all spending, endogenous and exogenous alike, would be vain.
Wow. Methinks you are letting your libertarian-capitalist ideology get ahead of the facts here.

Net neutrality is a principle of the net and has been since day one (it is a feature of the net due the design the military used with ARPNET to serve the military goal - packet routing requires 'net neutrality' to function properly).

As such, net neutrality was built into the original architecture of the net. It wasn't just invented, or some new regulation to be imposed upon the internet. All private interests who may have made investments in the internet have been aware of this all along so there is no new 'regulation' here at all.

Indeed, it is these private interests that are NOW asserting that the ought to have the right to engage in preferential traffic routing. It is they who seek to re-define or modify their agreements.

It is in response to these private interests seeking to usurp the internet for their own private commercial interests that a movement has risen with the goal of enshrining the net neutrality principle as a formal legal requirement (it is at present only an existing principle that defines the net architecture).
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old Sep 29th 2009, 01:30 PM
Daktoria's Avatar
Daktoria Daktoria is offline
World Citizen
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 721
Default Re: Net Neutrality

Like you're saying though, there's no legal regulation for it. Operational efficiency is different from legal (or moral) permissibility, and it isn't something that's discovered all at once nor is it something that should be automatically considered if there isn't a law in place prohibiting a market. Comes down to a positive versus negative perspective on implied purpose really. The government could demand that all ISPs manage traffic in a certain manner if the ISPs themselves want to have access to the internet as a whole, but that's intervention in an area that the government isn't necessarily knowledgable about despite how the internet's original architectural intentions have been explicitly outlined. We could still claim that intentions are more valuable than efficiency. However, this undermines those very intentions in the first place since they're predicated on providing optimal efficiency, and it ignores the value of ISP intentions for providing internet service.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old Oct 1st 2009, 01:35 AM
Evangeline's Avatar
Evangeline Evangeline is offline
Citizen
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Northern California
Posts: 439
Default Re: Net Neutrality

In case you don't know what net neutrality is, here is the FAQ from Google.

A Guide to Net Neutrality for Google Users
"Net neutrality" is an issue that will shape the future of the Internet. Google has created this guide to net neutrality, which includes a brief overview of the subject, an update on where things stand in the U.S. policy debate, a set of actions you can take to protect the Internet, and the text of an open letter from our CEO, Eric Schmidt.

What is Net Neutrality?
Network neutrality is the principle that Internet users should be in control of what content they view and what applications they use on the Internet. The Internet has operated according to this neutrality principle since its earliest days. Indeed, it is this neutrality that has allowed many companies, including Google, to launch, grow, and innovate. Fundamentally, net neutrality is about equal access to the Internet. In our view, the broadband carriers should not be permitted to use their market power to discriminate against competing applications or content. Just as telephone companies are not permitted to tell consumers who they can call or what they can say, broadband carriers should not be allowed to use their market power to control activity online. Today, the neutrality of the Internet is at stake as the broadband carriers want Congress's permission to determine what content gets to you first and fastest. Put simply, this would fundamentally alter the openness of the Internet.

What is the Current Status of Net Neutrality?
Net neutrality is a major issue as the U.S. considers new telecommunications laws. The U.S. House of Representatives passed its telecommunications bill, H.R. 5252, in May, without adequate net neutrality protections. Now the fight has moved to U.S. Senate. On June 28, the Senate Commerce Committee passed its own telecom bill, S. 2686. While an amendment to the bill that would have added meaningful net neutrality safeguards failed 11-11, this tie vote marks a significant political victory and gives the effort new momentum. The debate now shifts to the full Senate, where advocates will be working to get strong net neutrality language is any bill that the Senate considers.

http://www.google.com/help/netneutrality.html

Without net neutrality, the bigger websites with money to spend will be faster and our little websites which don't make a profit will be slower.

It will affect this website, my website, your websites and all other websites not owned by big corporations.

Maybe youtube can afford to pay for their website to be faster for you, but if there's another video website you like, perhaps they won't pay the extra fee and their site will slow done.

This will cause the smaller websites to go under while we get less diversity and less startups and just a few big companies that run everything, just like it has happened with our media and our banks and just about everything else in America due to the deregulations Reagan started and Clinton and Bush finished. It's destroying the middle class.
__________________
OMG GOP WTF?
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old Oct 1st 2009, 01:38 AM
Evangeline's Avatar
Evangeline Evangeline is offline
Citizen
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Northern California
Posts: 439
Default Re: Net Neutrality

And there's good news. Obama is for net neutrality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The President
One key to strengthening education, entrepreneurship, and innovation in communities like Troy is to harness the full power of the internet. That means faster and more widely available broadband– as well as rules to ensure that we preserve the fairness and openness that led to the flourishing of the internet in the first place. Today, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski is announcing a set of principles to preserve an open internet in which all Americans can participate and benefit. I am pleased that he is taking this step. It is an important reminder that the role of government is to provide investment that spurs innovation and common-sense ground rules to ensure that there is a level playing field for all comers who seek to contribute their innovations.
http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/...net-neutrality
__________________
OMG GOP WTF?
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old Oct 1st 2009, 06:47 PM
Michael's Avatar
Michael Michael is offline
Administrator
Herder of Cats
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14,835
Default Re: Net Neutrality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangeline View Post
In case you don't know what net neutrality is, here is the FAQ from Google.
I was all set to flag this post for "Best Post of the Week" honors until I realized that Google was the author, not Evangeline!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2008 - 2017, DiscussionWorldForum.com