tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7288950850564395895.post8487035851593240340..comments2021-08-06T17:36:53.143-05:00Comments on Ad Majorem: "Net Neutrality"Steve Schildwachterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05267248485736601931noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7288950850564395895.post-3571564957542237432010-08-26T18:13:44.529-05:002010-08-26T18:13:44.529-05:00The issue is bandwidth. Downloading a movie, thou...The issue is bandwidth. Downloading a movie, thousands of songs, software, etc uses more bandwidth than email. Instead of "slowing" the download of high-bandwidth data packets, the IPSs simply have to charge by the MB or GB or TB, just like the phone companies do.<br /><br />Using this model will allow the market to decide instead of the government.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7288950850564395895.post-58127969348866915212010-08-23T18:05:38.182-05:002010-08-23T18:05:38.182-05:00Thank you, Keith! Here are two links passed along...Thank you, Keith! Here are two links passed along by friends.<br /><br />Someone not wild about Net Neutrality suggested:<br />http://stopnetregulation.org/stop/amidst-the-%E2%80%9Cdeals%E2%80%9D-and-no-deals-the-reason-for-all-the-net-neutrality-chatter/<br /><br />Someone who likes Net Neutrality suggested:<br />http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/paul-rogat-loeb/30611/what-if-verizon-could-censor-your-telephone-conversations-why-net-neutrality-mattersSteve Schildwachterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05267248485736601931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7288950850564395895.post-77056753395881537942010-08-23T07:36:41.794-05:002010-08-23T07:36:41.794-05:00Hey Steve,
Per your question on Adweek, here's...Hey Steve,<br />Per your question on Adweek, here's are some links , in order, from Salon.com, Buzz Machine, NYT, Future of the Internet, and Mashable. Best, Keith<br /><br />http://www.salon.com/technology/dan_gillmor/201...<br /><br />http://www.buzzmachine.com/2010/08/10/internet-...<br /><br />http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/16/technology/16...<br /><br />http://futureoftheinternet.org/the-googleverizo...<br /><br />http://mashable.com/2010/08/09/google-verizon-p...KeithGoldbergnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7288950850564395895.post-10451355707152885312010-08-10T09:30:07.004-05:002010-08-10T09:30:07.004-05:00“Some of your more extravagant writers here might ...“Some of your more extravagant writers here might do well to wonder if there isn't a utopian naivete that has been attached to the anarchy that seems to be desired in the web. And to remember that the web is the place where lies travel fastest and truth travels slowly. The web is the place where only the technologically savvy thrive and leave everyone else to struggle.”<br /><br />What an astounding paragraph. Lies and truth travel at the exact same speed, people choose what they believe. How would tiers help this problem? Who is to say what is a truth and what is a lie? The corporation that can afford the best tier becomes the truth teller? I do spot naivete here. Openness is not the enemy of truth, but rather it is its savior.<br /><br />And the web is far from the only place where the savvy thrive.Adam Larsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7288950850564395895.post-9438594498499211982010-08-09T17:03:55.287-05:002010-08-09T17:03:55.287-05:00Steve -
Excellent question to ask. As much as I d...Steve -<br /><br />Excellent question to ask. As much as I dislike it, it doesn't seem possible to continue to evaluate all traffic over the Internet equally. When my neighbor chooses to watch all of their TV over the net, my basic access for email slows down. Yet, we are both charge the same rate.<br /><br />It should, perhaps, surprise us more that the perception has developed that equal access to as much bandwidth as you want from the Internet is a right - as if it were part of the Bill of Rights.<br /><br />Some of your more extravagant writers here might do well to wonder if there isn't a utopian naivete that has been attached to the anarchy that seems to be desired in the web. And to remember that the web is the place where lies travel fastest and truth travels slowly. The web is the place where only the technologically savvy thrive and leave everyone else to struggle.<br /><br />It's tricky, because it IS quite sad that lack of Internet savvy and access have become part of being economically less well off. <br /><br />But all in all, quite a complicated issue. Perhaps tier is most appropriate. Basic internet, high volume personal use, corporate time sensitive use, etc...<br /> <br />Hmmm...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7288950850564395895.post-87995115261367493322010-08-09T10:44:24.744-05:002010-08-09T10:44:24.744-05:00Steve, your newspaper/magazine analogy is off. Un...Steve, your newspaper/magazine analogy is off. Under net neutrality, magazines could still charge whatever they want for a subscription. It is the cost of getting the content to the newsstand that is fixed. <br /><br />Net neutrality is a means of preserving the internet as it currently exists. I am curious why anyone would even consider altering it now. Isn’t the internet an unequivocal success? It is the very openness of the internet that makes it what it is. Just because the Verizons of the world are having a hard time profiting off it is not a reason to threaten its openness.Adam Larsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7288950850564395895.post-48409689993975190542010-08-08T08:04:01.086-05:002010-08-08T08:04:01.086-05:00It might benefit everyone to stop and consider two...It might benefit everyone to stop and consider two facts. (1) The Internet was originally a military network (see Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet). (2) What Google and Verizon were going to control was not the Internet, but the cost of accessing it to their own subscribers.<br /><br />I agree with you both -- the Internet is not a commercial enterprise. I stand corrected. Access to it, however, is very much a business.<br /><br />Am I missing your point? Please help me understand your POV.Steve Schildwachterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05267248485736601931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7288950850564395895.post-49387611692720011482010-08-07T20:29:55.420-05:002010-08-07T20:29:55.420-05:00The ethos of the Internet was based on "free ...The ethos of the Internet was based on "free sharing of knowledge". A brave new world. But naive.<br />The corporations have been puzzled and wasted a lot of money trying to work out how to own this thing they did not create.<br /><br />They were always going to win in the end. Now they have the bulldozers out. Dollars and dumbing down is their agenda.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7288950850564395895.post-24335741254850106072010-08-06T16:15:36.403-05:002010-08-06T16:15:36.403-05:00Who said "it's a commercial enterprise&qu...Who said "it's a commercial enterprise"? Where do you think this is a valid truth? The internet is a tool for communication from its very origins. Commercial enterprise comes after the fact. Take off your marketing hat please and see it for what it is.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com