Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230
Net Neutrality
Net Neutrality
I have read till my eyes feel like they are going to bleed. I still have no idea what this is about. Can anyone explain to me a common user what this is about.
Wikipedia is your friend! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality
One of the major reasons that my eyes want to bleed. Laymans terms please no smoke, mirrors, and hot air. KISS
One of the major reasons that my eyes want to bleed. Laymans terms please no smoke, mirrors, and hot air. KISS
Well, keep it simple, is exactly what Harold did. As for the last S...a0wc39 wrote:Wikipedia is your friend! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality
One of the major reasons that my eyes want to bleed. Laymans terms please no smoke, mirrors, and hot air. KISS
It's very hard to distill a topic like this down into a '20 second sound bite' because there is so much opinion involved and ones own opinion and point of view influence what one considers to be "smoke", "mirrors" or "hot air".
But to me it seems to be, in simple terms, the USA Gov. should turn over control to the world (instead of big powerful corporations) but that will not be easy to accomplish. Once 'premium fees' for 'premium' service happen then there is a defacto censorship possible.
[edit: when I read it again, my first didn't even make sense to me, that's one of the troubles with simple comments.]
From the Wikipedia article...
For many years, Internet access across the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) was governed by common carrier regulations. These guidelines required unbundling of communications services and ISP functions. However, on August 5, 2005, the US Federal Communication Commission reclassified DSL services as Information Services rather than Telecommunications Services, and replaced common carrier requirements with a set of four less-restrictive net neutrality principles. This sparked a debate over whether or not Internet Service Providers should also be allowed to discriminate between different service providers by offering higher network priority to higher-paying companies and customers, allowing some services to operate faster or more predictably and ultimately become more acceptable to end users.
Cable modem Internet access had always been classified an Information Service and not regulated by common carrier law, just as the high-speed data links that make up the Internet's core are non-regulated. --- SNIP ---
Telecommunications companies, having invested billions of dollars in new network infrastructure, believe they have the right to operate the network with minimal government interference. They believe that imposing net neutrality regulations would prevent them from expanding and improving Internet access for their customers, stifling incentives to develop new technologies and possibly leading to higher prices for consumers.
Problem No. 1 is that anybody who thinks that a US phone company is going to foster innovation on its own is fooling himself. Innovation to the phone company means adding more colors or offering central office voice-mail. My experience is that internet via cable company is painless and highly available, whereas internet via DSL (phone company) is a major headache and hardly ever available in rural areas.
Problem No. 2 is that the FCC made the wrong decision at the wrong time. They reclassified DSL as information service just when VoIP is starting to take off, meaning that the internet was taking on more characteristics of telecommunications.
But then, common sense says that the distinction between information services and telecommunication is artificial.
Sounds to me like common carrier requirements are A Good Thing and should be imposed on all ISPs, DSL and Cable.
For many years, Internet access across the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) was governed by common carrier regulations. These guidelines required unbundling of communications services and ISP functions. However, on August 5, 2005, the US Federal Communication Commission reclassified DSL services as Information Services rather than Telecommunications Services, and replaced common carrier requirements with a set of four less-restrictive net neutrality principles. This sparked a debate over whether or not Internet Service Providers should also be allowed to discriminate between different service providers by offering higher network priority to higher-paying companies and customers, allowing some services to operate faster or more predictably and ultimately become more acceptable to end users.
Cable modem Internet access had always been classified an Information Service and not regulated by common carrier law, just as the high-speed data links that make up the Internet's core are non-regulated. --- SNIP ---
Telecommunications companies, having invested billions of dollars in new network infrastructure, believe they have the right to operate the network with minimal government interference. They believe that imposing net neutrality regulations would prevent them from expanding and improving Internet access for their customers, stifling incentives to develop new technologies and possibly leading to higher prices for consumers.
Problem No. 1 is that anybody who thinks that a US phone company is going to foster innovation on its own is fooling himself. Innovation to the phone company means adding more colors or offering central office voice-mail. My experience is that internet via cable company is painless and highly available, whereas internet via DSL (phone company) is a major headache and hardly ever available in rural areas.
Problem No. 2 is that the FCC made the wrong decision at the wrong time. They reclassified DSL as information service just when VoIP is starting to take off, meaning that the internet was taking on more characteristics of telecommunications.
But then, common sense says that the distinction between information services and telecommunication is artificial.
Sounds to me like common carrier requirements are A Good Thing and should be imposed on all ISPs, DSL and Cable.
-
glidermike
- Posts: 14
- Joined: 2006-08-21 23:10
- Location: Toronto
- Contact:
net neutrality
simply put its this: an internet provider provides an internet "gateway"to your home. Be it cable, dsl or satelite or smoke signal. Although the "provider" ownes the cable(or the pipe through which the signal travels) They are not responsible for "content" and cannot block or restrict use of the medium or program that goes through it. (like railways they are called a "common carrier")
The analogy is like this:
say you get phone service from freds phone company.
fred offers special "fred phones" to go with the service, but you have your own.Fred cannot give priority to customers that use "fred phones" and make you go on hold while the other users go fast.
The cable and Phone companies have decided to change this ,and now want to offer "special tiered services"where higher paying customers get better service than lower paying ones. Also because the companies are offering "special services" (voip ect) they are getting filters that restrict users from accessing content not provided ( and therefore paid ) by the company.
Because the cable/phone companies own the pipes that go to your home they now say that they can block or restrict what you can access through "their pipes"
In effect they can block (for instance) foriegn content, e-mail , news outlets, file sharing, or anything that they think could be in another "tier" of service.( or that they just don't like )
Just look at the shennanigens over at AOL
The analogy is like this:
say you get phone service from freds phone company.
fred offers special "fred phones" to go with the service, but you have your own.Fred cannot give priority to customers that use "fred phones" and make you go on hold while the other users go fast.
The cable and Phone companies have decided to change this ,and now want to offer "special tiered services"where higher paying customers get better service than lower paying ones. Also because the companies are offering "special services" (voip ect) they are getting filters that restrict users from accessing content not provided ( and therefore paid ) by the company.
Because the cable/phone companies own the pipes that go to your home they now say that they can block or restrict what you can access through "their pipes"
In effect they can block (for instance) foriegn content, e-mail , news outlets, file sharing, or anything that they think could be in another "tier" of service.( or that they just don't like )
Just look at the shennanigens over at AOL
Linux Registered User #406181