Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
bcrscahh198987

An essay about Net Neutrality

16 posts in this topic

I'm sure quite some of you might of never heard of Net neutrality, but it seems that the internet is going to be all about equal access or tiered access. Equal access allows people to access all websites equally, without having the ISP discriminate against certain sites that don't pay up(Like slowing down the page load, or blocking the site completely). Tiered Access allows websites to pay certain fees so they have a faster loading time to people like us who uses the net, and some radical new technologies might be developed as ISPs invest more money into the fast tier.

I don't truly understand what the hell Net Neutrality is, even tho the above seems an easy explaination, I do my research about it and ended up with more questions.

I'm writing my essay about it and havn't formed my thesis yet.

as for my data gathering, I went to netcompetition.org and savetheinternet.com, and did a whois on both domains. I found some interesting results.

http://netcompetition.org/index.php/go/about-us-members/ - all the members here are mainly Tel Comms

http://www.savetheinternet.com/=coalition most of the members here are free speech advocates or liberal think tanks.

I digged around some more and found this http://delivery.acm.org/10.1145/1200000/11...CFTOKEN=6184618

It seems to a technical paper attempting to analyze some aspects of net neutrality.

You guys got any ideas on this?

Please no stupid asshole post.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another interesting thing about Net Neutrality is that companies like google and microsoft are also involved.

http://www.microsoft.com/freedomtoinnovate...try/letter.aspx

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

Apparent the guy who wrote the letter on the microsoft page is a lobbyist, because the end of the letter says "Managing Director, Federal Government Affairs

Associate General Counsel".

Just an interesting idea.

Please don't read it all my post and say nothing, but don't say stupid things.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically it will be like this.

User: "Oh, lets see, I want to see the hot girl making lemonade"

Corporation: "Well you can watch a fat man in the hot dog suit"

User: "But I want hot girl making lemonade"

Corporation: "Just watch the fat man in the hot dog suit, it's the same thing"

User: "No it's not, I want Lemonade girl"

Corporation: "Well you should of thought of that when you decided to be middle class"

User: "Damn"

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A world without Net Neutrality will be horrible, Sites like binrev would die off! :(

5z6vt4n720249il6.jpg

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A world without Net Neutrality will be horrible, Sites like binrev would die off! :(

Just so no one gets confused that is a mock-up. We are safe for now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A world without Net Neutrality will be horrible, Sites like binrev would die off! :(

Just so no one gets confused that is a mock-up. We are safe for now.

Apologies, Yes that's fake.. but that possible future should be enough scare anyone...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't looking for opinions, I was looking for conclusive materials that might help me decide on a thesis.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well... Google is buying dark fiber. Dark Fiber. sounds to me like google wants to have some fun controling the high speed internet. also i read somwhere, cant remember the exact spot. but google wants to build these big tractor trailers with massive storage on them that will "suck up" a copy of the internet onto them. If google does this they will control every aspect of the internet. want fiber optic internet? buy it from google and use google's copy of the internet. but as with all issues we should use Occam's razor to help with this issue

Edited by Eater of PIE!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good materials. I will use your materials very well. When I'm done using it, I will post the essay here.

Expect my essay to exceed 1000 words. It will be a very comprehensive essay.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

rarebit , Eater of pie, tioscti, nice job.

I'm trying to compile all this material and see what/who/when/why/how.

I will be back within a few days with some results.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came back with some more confusing conclusions.

I just figured out how unreliable wikipedia is. They are based on consensus, not on expert authority. Many ideas on net neutrality was from sources not cited.

I'm pretty sure someone really truly knows what is going on. Much of my sources are full of people who have very little technical knowledge about networking. So I'm quite sure my sources for my essay have to be revised.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I came back with some more confusing conclusions.

I just figured out how unreliable wikipedia is. They are based on consensus, not on expert authority. Many ideas on net neutrality was from sources not cited.

I'm pretty sure someone really truly knows what is going on. Much of my sources are full of people who have very little technical knowledge about networking. So I'm quite sure my sources for my essay have to be revised.

This is an opinion, what you weren't looking for, but what I feel is at the very root of the issue. People who think Net Neutrality is a needed change argue that since taxpayers paid for the Internet, they own all the hardware that makes it work. This is a fallacy.

A great analogy to this is that it is like what the IRS found out charging currency value of the metal in the $50 one ounce gold coins a man paid his employees instead of a seven hundred dollar paycheck. They stamped the things $50, and they need to be careful what they wish for. The next logical step would be you and I paying tax on the value of the paper the greenbacks we get paid instead of the value on the bill.

Same thing here. The IRS learned be careful what you wish for. People pay taxes to subsidize the Internet, but don't own the profits and goods the product produces. I paid taxes on Federal financial aid as well. Do I own the end product the student creates in any way? Why not? I built him. Be careful what you wish for.

That is the root of the argument against the "taxpayer" reasoning IMO.

Better sources against Net Neutrality instead of Wikipedia? Ones with technical understanding? You could go with most of the engineers that collectively created the internet except Vint Cerf.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7011801508.html

http://www.theregister.com/2007/01/18/kahn...rality_warning/

You simply can't take Cerf's genuine felling on the issue as a certainty. He is on Google's payroll. It seems like you get the general feeling that Google and Microsoft and these other huge companies are supporting this because they benefit the most. Not to help us and because they are altruistic good guys.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I came back with some more confusing conclusions.

I just figured out how unreliable wikipedia is. They are based on consensus, not on expert authority. Many ideas on net neutrality was from sources not cited.

I'm pretty sure someone really truly knows what is going on. Much of my sources are full of people who have very little technical knowledge about networking. So I'm quite sure my sources for my essay have to be revised.

This is an opinion, what you weren't looking for, but what I feel is at the very root of the issue. People who think Net Neutrality is a needed change argue that since taxpayers paid for the Internet, they own all the hardware that makes it work. This is a fallacy.

A great analogy to this is that it is like what the IRS found out charging currency value of the metal in the $50 one ounce gold coins a man paid his employees instead of a seven hundred dollar paycheck. They stamped the things $50, and they need to be careful what they wish for. The next logical step would be you and I paying tax on the value of the paper the greenbacks we get paid instead of the value on the bill.

Same thing here. The IRS learned be careful what you wish for. People pay taxes to subsidize the Internet, but don't own the profits and goods the product produces. I paid taxes on Federal financial aid as well. Do I own the end product the student creates in any way? Why not? I built him. Be careful what you wish for.

That is the root of the argument against the "taxpayer" reasoning IMO.

Better sources against Net Neutrality instead of Wikipedia? Ones with technical understanding? You could go with most of the engineers that collectively created the internet except Vint Cerf.

<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7011801508.html" target="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7011801508.html</a>

<a href="http://www.theregister.com/2007/01/18/kahn...rality_warning/" target="_blank">http://www.theregister.com/2007/01/18/kahn...rality_warning/</a>

You simply can't take Cerf's genuine felling on the issue as a certainty. He is on Google's payroll. It seems like you get the general feeling that Google and Microsoft and these other huge companies are supporting this because they benefit the most. Not to help us and because they are altruistic good guys.

I'm trying to use some of my studies from economy class to help determine some conclusion about the issue. I havn't understand much about net neutrality technical info , or even find any technical information about it.

I will be coming back with some more results. I'm going to learn a thing or two about networking. I will be back within a week.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This seemed the most appropriate old-post to reopen.

Net Neutrality - We're screwed

Net neutrality, the kind your ISP wants which is anything but, will be the end of the internet. I make that claim based on the idea that once this form of net neutrality becomes reality then your ISP will decide which protocols will get priority treatment. So imagine trying to bittorrent/telnet/ssh a file and suppose that your ISP does not throttle it. Well, you still need to get across the backbone carrier and possibly the ISP of the server at the other end. That's three networks that all have to agree not to throttle bittorrent/telnet/ssh in order for you to get a decent speed or even just a connection. Understand too, that the problem will only get worse when you have to traverse multiple ISP's.

The reason they want this is so your ISP can charge for 'priority' traffic but in order for them to guarantee that priority you will have to stay completely within the bounds of their network. Otherwise they will need to have agreements with *every* other ISP in the nation and that would be expensive in the extreme. So welcome to the world of monopoly ISP's.

AOL is dead! Long live COMCAST!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0