[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

Now - your not going to allow a higher QoS for some traffic? So VoIP packets are going to get the same urgency with, let say a Sprint T3 that FTP stuff is getting? This KILLS VoIP! Its realtime traffic. If you don't allow that traffic to have priority, your negating the entire technology!

VoIP is a different class:

"Managed" or "specialized" services, such as VOIP or subscription video services, may fall into a special category since they "may differ from broadband Internet access services in ways that recommend a different policy approach, and it may be inappropriate to apply the rules proposed here." The FCC is looking for input on how to approach this special class of services.

Your going to make sure that the leech sucking down the latest game with BT has the same speed for his theft that a business employing hundreds has to make its phone calls and keep people employed.... And you think this is a good idea?????? WHY?????

How do they know what this "leech" is downloading? Maybe he's downloading a LINUX distro, or a library of academic papers. Because some bad people do some bad things is no reason to cap everyone. If they can prove that they're limiting illegal downloads, they are free to do so under these rules. Nothing is stopping them.

First off - this kills a major technology used today by the majority of businesses. Thats BAD.

No it's not. The technology in question is limiting people with legitimate usage.

After all, if your a liberal that can't stand fox news for example, then what better way to end their threat by ostracizing them from sources of news (like the white house - where I expect fox news will have their press credentials revoked soon enough), and then removing ways people access them, like the internet?

This is EXACTLY what net neutrality is trying to PREVENT.

Now - you hurt business by taking away a money saving technology, you cost them, and thus the consumers more money.

The telecoms are not magically going to drop prices if they can discriminate which traffic they allow through their network. Prices will go up regardless.

You limit citizen's access to independant information.

Sooo, by ensuring that ISPs allow equal access to all websites and legal devices, you're limiting access to independant information? WTF?

Then add in "cap and trade", "environmental reparations", health care "reform", etc, - all additional burdens on the economy.

Red Herring fallacy