Net neutrality legislation

CaptainHaplo · 10-21-09, 06:25 PM

I too have heard alot about this - and so far the ONLY beef I have against it is that it appears (from the limited research I have had time to do) to create a "standard" of access to which everyone should have. However, in creating this standard, there is no ability to offer "above standard" access.

The problem here isn't censorship, the problem is it will KILL businesses.

Everyone - and by that we are talking an individual or a company - will end up with the same size "pipe" to the internet. Given current technology, and what is on the near horizon, you have a limited total pipe to push data through. With "net neutrality", grandma who never turns on her computer will have a certain amount of throughput reserved for her, should she ever do so. Just because its not in use doesn't mean someone else can use it until she wants to.

Now when grandma checks her email, gets a new cookie recipe and then logs off, did she use nearly the amount of pipe that say.... a major company did? Of course not. But with this, that same company is limited to the same data flow amounts as grandma.

VOIP? Forget about it. Phone costs alone for companies will skyrocket. Oh... and don't forget - your friendly neighborhood google and yahoo and msn and everyone else - they get the same size pipe you do. So what happens when 1000 people try to access google at the same time, and your all trying to get your request through that limited pipe? Can you say LAG????

Again, my understanding is incomplete, but what I have seen looks like some serious support by the phone companies, because this will give them a serious influx of cash oon POTS service again, a market that has languished in recent years.

One thing you should always do when you look at any legislation.....

Follow the money....

People seem to be concerned this is censorship. Its actually more about hurting larger businesses.

10-21-09, 06:25 PM	#10
CaptainHaplo Silent Hunter Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4,404 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 0	I too have heard alot about this - and so far the ONLY beef I have against it is that it appears (from the limited research I have had time to do) to create a "standard" of access to which everyone should have. However, in creating this standard, there is no ability to offer "above standard" access. The problem here isn't censorship, the problem is it will KILL businesses. Everyone - and by that we are talking an individual or a company - will end up with the same size "pipe" to the internet. Given current technology, and what is on the near horizon, you have a limited total pipe to push data through. With "net neutrality", grandma who never turns on her computer will have a certain amount of throughput reserved for her, should she ever do so. Just because its not in use doesn't mean someone else can use it until she wants to. Now when grandma checks her email, gets a new cookie recipe and then logs off, did she use nearly the amount of pipe that say.... a major company did? Of course not. But with this, that same company is limited to the same data flow amounts as grandma. VOIP? Forget about it. Phone costs alone for companies will skyrocket. Oh... and don't forget - your friendly neighborhood google and yahoo and msn and everyone else - they get the same size pipe you do. So what happens when 1000 people try to access google at the same time, and your all trying to get your request through that limited pipe? Can you say LAG???? Again, my understanding is incomplete, but what I have seen looks like some serious support by the phone companies, because this will give them a serious influx of cash oon POTS service again, a market that has languished in recent years. One thing you should always do when you look at any legislation..... Follow the money.... People seem to be concerned this is censorship. Its actually more about hurting larger businesses. __________________ Good Hunting! Captain Haplo