FTC: "Net neutrality is no big deal" - bit-tech.net Forums

Da Dego · 29th Jun 2007, 16:26

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/06..._no_big_deal/1

In utter proof that American policy makers really do think the internet is a big thing used to catch fish, the FTC has stated that net neutrality is not a big deal.

specofdust · 29th Jun 2007, 16:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by article

that she feels internet providers charging too much for bandwidth is an unlikely concern.

Buwahahaha xD - Ok, give this lady a prize. She gets the "most halucinagens taken in a single hour running up to a press release" award. Every ISP on the planet is already overcharging for bandwidth that they refuse to give you if you actually try and make use of their "unlimted" services. What complete an utter idiocy. This makes me feel so much better about the incompetancy levels of British telecomms.

DXR_13KE · 29th Jun 2007, 17:40

i don't know if i laugh or if i crap my self.... no one is that blind and dumb.

Flyingsheep · 29th Jun 2007, 18:21

We're all doomed over here. Good bye internets...

Veles · 29th Jun 2007, 18:49

We're doomed everywhere

Phil Rhodes · 29th Jun 2007, 19:31

Bandwidth availability is determined, in the end, by how much the service providers are willing to spend on digging up streets and putting in cables.

It eludes me quite why this should not be paid for by the people who use it most.

Phil

specofdust · 29th Jun 2007, 19:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil Rhodes

Bandwidth availability is determined, in the end, by how much the service providers are willing to spend on digging up streets and putting in cables.

It eludes me quite why this should not be paid for by the people who use it most.

Phil

No-one says that shouldn't be the case, it's just us net-neutrality proponents don't think that anyone should have to pay twice just to ensure their quality of service isn't retarded.

Hells_Bliss · 29th Jun 2007, 19:36

I wish I could vote, could we please get some technologically savvy politicians??! And no I don't mean hiring somebody to make you a myspace page.

We already pay a stupid amount for reasonable internet, I mean, the infrastructure is already in place, it follows the same lines as those that have been in place since the 70's (well cable at least) so I don't understand why I have to pay the same price again for TV and Internet, and whoever thinks the telco's won't gouge the consumer to an inch of their life if net neutrality goes the way of the dodo is on crack.

Tyinsar · 29th Jun 2007, 21:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by specofdust

Buwahahaha xD - Ok, give this lady a prize. She gets the "most halucinagens taken in a single hour running up to a press release" award. Every ISP on the planet is already overcharging for bandwidth that they refuse to give you if you actually try and make use of their "unlimted" services. What complete an utter idiocy. ...

Quoted for truth

devdevil85 · 29th Jun 2007, 21:42

My girlfriend's family is already paying twice over for Comcast than what my family is for our TimeWarner service and it is a piece of s*it; their internet is always hickupping or it's down for a few hours and don't get me started on their TV service from them either (it gets countless communication errors and a b*tch to navigate through. The reason why I think it's the way it is: Comcast is the only provider in her neighborhood and they can only afford the most affordable package and because of this they constantly put up with slow bandwith and constant annoyances, yet my family because there are mutliple providers in our neighborhood offer us great, error-free service which you would have to pay an arm and a leg for where my girlfriend lives. I know the TV part has nothing to do with NetNeutrality, but it's still something I wanted to point out. Anyways, the internet should be neutral to whoever wants to use it. So what if you want to download tons of stuff and it takes up every last bit of your available bandwith, you paid for that service and they should charge you the same as someone who doesn't use it all up. I mean should they charge people more for watching more TV than their neighbor who isn't home everyday to watch it? The government needs to be smarter and be more for the consumer than for the service providers. The net needs to stay neutral. One word to describe why I think this has started popping up: BitTorrent.

specofdust · 29th Jun 2007, 21:49

No, this has started popping up because telecomms companies saw a way to make lots more money, namely by extorting big business into paying not only for its bandwidth from its own ISP, but paying every ISP it has customers with to not gimp its website in favour of other websites. If an ISP is legally allowed to say to a company like amazon "We're going to make your site take 1 minute to load each page, whereas your leading competitors have all paid up and are loading in 2.5 seconds" then what choice does amazon have but to pay up or perish? This is the only thing anti-net neutrality laws are for, to enable extortion of business in order that ISP's can make more money from people who can afford to pay the bribes. Extortion is illegal though, and thus net neutrality should be enshrined in law.

proxess · 30th Jun 2007, 00:16

What if ISPs actually stopped *cough*illegal*cough* throttling and lieing in their speed advertisements? "You get a 4mbit connectionz!" and in the end if your lucky enough to get 100kb/s your my hero.

Fozzy · 30th Jun 2007, 01:33

Providers will do what's best for business. If they charge more than people are willing to pay they will loose money because people will just drop the service. That's what free market is and that's why capitalism works. There is no concern here.

DarkLord7854 · 30th Jun 2007, 03:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fozzy

Providers will do what's best for business. If they charge more than people are willing to pay they will loose money because people will just drop the service. That's what free market is and that's why capitalism works. There is no concern here.

Problem is, if ALL companies do it, then what are you going to do? Boycott the internet?

completemadness · 30th Jun 2007, 04:07

sadly the Internet is like a service, like your gas, phone or electricity

however, your Internet connection seems very overpriced, hell i think i pay more for the Internet then i do for electricity

though i have to wonder if throttling certain things (for example P2P) when the connection is contended, to allow important (things that cant wait) things to go through (like games, or voip) then that's OK

its better then the current situation where a number of providers just throttle your whole connection at peak times to make sure they don't get contended

of course, the best solution would just be to have an infrastructure that supports the speeds people want when there is high demand
You don't see the national grid supplying you with less power at peak times because it cant handle the load

specofdust · 30th Jun 2007, 08:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fozzy

Providers will do what's best for business. If they charge more than people are willing to pay they will loose money because people will just drop the service. That's what free market is and that's why capitalism works. There is no concern here.

You're wrong. Net neutrality protects against extortion. Extortion is illegal even in lazzaiz-faire capitalism. Most people won't drop services, they will simply shop where is fast. It ammounts to nothing more than suited gangsters destroying businesses that will not pay the bribe, and it is a concern.

mclean007 · 30th Jun 2007, 10:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by specofdust

You're wrong. Net neutrality protects against extortion. Extortion is illegal even in lazzaiz-faire capitalism. Most people won't drop services, they will simply shop where is fast. It ammounts to nothing more than suited gangsters destroying businesses that will not pay the bribe, and it is a concern.

Yup, there are few enough players in the market, and the barrier to entry is sufficiently high, and internet presence is now so fundamental to almost any kind of business, that there is a real risk of the formation of price-fixing cartels

ZERO <ibis> · 30th Jun 2007, 11:26

Last time i checked we are in the information age. Now what is that big thing that is the center of the information age? Oh yea the internet, well if that is the most important thing in the information age it is kind of like how important steel oil and coal were in the industrial age. The government kept a close eye on those things because if they got out of hand people would just keep paying b/c they have no choice.

If the internet is allowed to be price fixed then it could very well destroy the economy. This is because, one businesses would lose money and raise their prices, two companies will cut jobs to save money, three people will be spending more in internet b/c in todays world you half to have it(just like oil) and people will have less money to spend. With less spending the econ will go deeper into defect and the system repeats it's self, prices go up and spending goes down until a total failure occurs.

The problem is that congress is not smart enough to realize how important the internet now is to the survival of our nation. How can a nation remain completive in the future if it allows the technology that that future is based on to be killed.

ElZog · 30th Jun 2007, 13:46

I'm sure if companies start charging for premium services to get faster access to websites competing with their product, some internet company will realise that all the net neutrality advocates will hate this and supply a service directed to us with homogenous connection. The company would make such an absolute mint doing this that hopefully the other companies would need to change back.

DXR_13KE · 30th Jun 2007, 14:27

money speaks louder than consumer complaints.

29th Jun 2007, 16:26	#1
Da Dego Brett Thomas Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Cleveland, OH USA Posts: 3,906	FTC: "Net neutrality is no big deal" http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/06..._no_big_deal/1 In utter proof that American policy makers really do think the internet is a big thing used to catch fish, the FTC has stated that net neutrality is not a big deal. __________________ "Frankly that seems overkill. iluvtrees2 arguing with spec is the intellectual equivalent of a bunny rabbit taking on a pissed-off lion." - Nexxo

29th Jun 2007, 17:40	#3
DXR_13KE Madeira's banana is the best!!! Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Madeira ; Portugal Posts: 6,466	i don't know if i laugh or if i crap my self.... no one is that blind and dumb. __________________ *Renegade X - 0.40 Release!* <---- CLICK!

29th Jun 2007, 19:36	#8
Hells_Bliss Supermodder Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: NC, USA Posts: 548	I wish I could vote, could we please get some technologically savvy politicians??! And no I don't mean hiring somebody to make you a myspace page. We already pay a stupid amount for reasonable internet, I mean, the infrastructure is already in place, it follows the same lines as those that have been in place since the 70's (well cable at least) so I don't understand why I have to pay the same price again for TV and Internet, and whoever thinks the telco's won't gouge the consumer to an inch of their life if net neutrality goes the way of the dodo is on crack. __________________ Asus P5N32-SLi Extreme, Intel Conroe E6600 @ 2.4GHz, 4GB Corsair XMS2 @ 1060MHz, eVGA GeForce 8800 GTX @ 621MHz, 2 WD 250GB 7200RPM HDD's, Creative Soundblaster Fatal1ty pro

29th Jun 2007, 21:42	#10
devdevil85 Hypermodder Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: US of A Posts: 884	My girlfriend's family is already paying twice over for Comcast than what my family is for our TimeWarner service and it is a piece of sit; their internet is always hickupping or it's down for a few hours and don't get me started on their TV service from them either (it gets countless communication errors and a btch to navigate through. The reason why I think it's the way it is: Comcast is the only provider in her neighborhood and they can only afford the most affordable package and because of this they constantly put up with slow bandwith and constant annoyances, yet my family because there are mutliple providers in our neighborhood offer us great, error-free service which you would have to pay an arm and a leg for where my girlfriend lives. I know the TV part has nothing to do with NetNeutrality, but it's still something I wanted to point out. Anyways, the internet should be neutral to whoever wants to use it. So what if you want to download tons of stuff and it takes up every last bit of your available bandwith, you paid for that service and they should charge you the same as someone who doesn't use it all up. I mean should they charge people more for watching more TV than their neighbor who isn't home everyday to watch it? The government needs to be smarter and be more for the consumer than for the service providers. The net needs to stay neutral. One word to describe why I think this has started popping up: BitTorrent. Last edited by devdevil85; 29th Jun 2007 at 21:48.

29th Jun 2007, 21:49	#11
specofdust Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Aberdeen, UK, EU Posts: 7,607	No, this has started popping up because telecomms companies saw a way to make lots more money, namely by extorting big business into paying not only for its bandwidth from its own ISP, but paying every ISP it has customers with to not gimp its website in favour of other websites. If an ISP is legally allowed to say to a company like amazon "We're going to make your site take 1 minute to load each page, whereas your leading competitors have all paid up and are loading in 2.5 seconds" then what choice does amazon have but to pay up or perish? This is the only thing anti-net neutrality laws are for, to enable extortion of business in order that ISP's can make more money from people who can afford to pay the bribes. Extortion is illegal though, and thus net neutrality should be enshrined in law. __________________ Like marmite, only no-one hates it Mmm bop!

29th Jun 2007, 18:21	#4
Flyingsheep Minimodder Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 25	We're all doomed over here. Good bye internets...

29th Jun 2007, 19:31	#6
Phil Rhodes Supermodder Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 574	Bandwidth availability is determined, in the end, by how much the service providers are willing to spend on digging up streets and putting in cables. It eludes me quite why this should not be paid for by the people who use it most. Phil

30th Jun 2007, 00:16	#12
proxess Victim of AdvancedModernCapitalism Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: The town of Love, Funchal Posts: 597	What if ISPs actually stopped coughillegalcough throttling and lieing in their speed advertisements? "You get a 4mbit connectionz!" and in the end if your lucky enough to get 100kb/s your my hero. __________________ Netbook: Asus eeePC 901; 12Gb SDD; Custom Ubuntu 9.04 Minimal Compiz Standalone. Laptop: Intel Centrino Duo T5500 1.66ghz; 2048mb RAM; ATI Mobility Radeon x2300; Hitachi 120gb iPod Classic 120GB; Maxtor 160GB External; Ubuntu 9.10 x64 and Windows 7 x64.

30th Jun 2007, 01:33	#13
Fozzy Ultramodder Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Olympia, WA Posts: 1,386	Providers will do what's best for business. If they charge more than people are willing to pay they will loose money because people will just drop the service. That's what free market is and that's why capitalism works. There is no concern here. __________________ Sponsors: http://www.koolance.com/images/homeimage01.jpg http://www.dangerden.com/templates/r...eader-wide.jpg http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/e...age00001-2.jpg

30th Jun 2007, 04:07	#15
completemadness Hypermodder Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 887	sadly the Internet is like a service, like your gas, phone or electricity however, your Internet connection seems very overpriced, hell i think i pay more for the Internet then i do for electricity though i have to wonder if throttling certain things (for example P2P) when the connection is contended, to allow important (things that cant wait) things to go through (like games, or voip) then that's OK its better then the current situation where a number of providers just throttle your whole connection at peak times to make sure they don't get contended of course, the best solution would just be to have an infrastructure that supports the speeds people want when there is high demand You don't see the national grid supplying you with less power at peak times because it cant handle the load Last edited by completemadness; 30th Jun 2007 at 04:15.

30th Jun 2007, 11:26	#18
ZERO <ibis> Supermodder Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Atlanta Posts: 263	Last time i checked we are in the information age. Now what is that big thing that is the center of the information age? Oh yea the internet, well if that is the most important thing in the information age it is kind of like how important steel oil and coal were in the industrial age. The government kept a close eye on those things because if they got out of hand people would just keep paying b/c they have no choice. If the internet is allowed to be price fixed then it could very well destroy the economy. This is because, one businesses would lose money and raise their prices, two companies will cut jobs to save money, three people will be spending more in internet b/c in todays world you half to have it(just like oil) and people will have less money to spend. With less spending the econ will go deeper into defect and the system repeats it's self, prices go up and spending goes down until a total failure occurs. The problem is that congress is not smart enough to realize how important the internet now is to the survival of our nation. How can a nation remain completive in the future if it allows the technology that that future is based on to be killed. __________________ 965 @ 4.26GHz-P6T DELUXE-GTX 280@750&1307-DDR3 Triple Channel@1001 MHz-RAID 0 Cheta 15.6k SAS-All Water cooled IBIS GAMING

30th Jun 2007, 13:46	#19
ElZog Defeater of Satan's Transformo Sofa Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Green Fields Posts: 233	I'm sure if companies start charging for premium services to get faster access to websites competing with their product, some internet company will realise that all the net neutrality advocates will hate this and supply a service directed to us with homogenous connection. The company would make such an absolute mint doing this that hopefully the other companies would need to change back. __________________ All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.

30th Jun 2007, 14:27	#20
DXR_13KE Madeira's banana is the best!!! Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Madeira ; Portugal Posts: 6,466	money speaks louder than consumer complaints. __________________ *Renegade X - 0.40 Release!* <---- CLICK!