Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Net Neutrality Protest Slowdowns

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Net Neutrality Protest Slowdowns

    I thought this was an important story to get out there so people don't panic when it happens. Several sites will be slowing things down to demonstrate what will happen if corporations like Comcast get their way in the Net Neutrality battle. It is an extremely important issue.

    http://deadline.com/2014/09/netflix-...rotest-832079/
    Susan Ivanova, "I'll be in the car."

  • #2
    Originally posted by Looney View Post
    I thought this was an important story to get out there so people don't panic when it happens. Several sites will be slowing things down to demonstrate what will happen if corporations like Comcast get their way in the Net Neutrality battle. It is an extremely important issue.

    http://deadline.com/2014/09/netflix-...rotest-832079/
    Totally agree. I petitioned against the UK version of this, with the government trying to impose restrictions at an ISP level, or an 'opt in' for what they deemed to be adult material. Total nonsense and not thought through at all.
    Captain John Sheridan: I really *hate* it when you do that.

    Kosh: Good!

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Ubik View Post
      Total nonsense and not thought through at all.
      Oh it is very well thought through here. It is all about corporate profits and control.
      Susan Ivanova, "I'll be in the car."

      Comment


      • #4
        Hi. I feel embarrassed to ask this, but what is this?

        I read the article and was still confused. I've heard about attempts to regulate internet, but the article seems to want more regulation. More regulation and more government involvment is always a bad thing, because if you need something done well, the government will surely botch it up.

        Can you explain, in your own words of course, what's happening?
        "And what kind of head of Security would I be if I let people like me know things that I'm not supposed to know? I mean, I know what I know because I have to know it. And if I don't have to know it, I don't tell me, and I don't let anyone else tell me either. " And I can give you reasonable assurances that the head of Security will not report you for doing so."
        "Because you won't tell yourself about it?"

        "I try never to get involved in my own life, too much trouble."

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Marsden View Post
          Hi. I feel embarrassed to ask this, but what is this?

          I read the article and was still confused. I've heard about attempts to regulate internet, but the article seems to want more regulation. More regulation and more government involvment is always a bad thing, because if you need something done well, the government will surely botch it up.

          Can you explain, in your own words of course, what's happening?
          In my words. Net neutrality is the idea that no one can pay to get priority traffic over others, eg. if a really large streaming. could pay a fortune for getting priority on their traffic, a newly started streaming company would not have the resources to pay for the same high bandwidth.

          As a current example, if Netflix could do that now, no new streaming upstart would have a chance to deliver the same service, and there would be no competition.

          The same would be the case for non streaming small websites etc. They would just, eventually slow down to a crawl, and the freedom of expression we know on the Net now, would slowly (or not so slowly) disappear because no normal person or small company could afford to be "heard".

          Looney ?
          Jan from Denmark

          My blog :

          http://www.babylonlurker.dk

          "Our thoughts form the Universe - they *always* matter"

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by babylonlurker View Post
            In my words. Net neutrality is the idea that no one can pay to get priority traffic over others, eg. if a really large streaming. could pay a fortune for getting priority on their traffic, a newly started streaming company would not have the resources to pay for the same high bandwidth.

            As a current example, if Netflix could do that now, no new streaming upstart would have a chance to deliver the same service, and there would be no competition.

            The same would be the case for non streaming small websites etc. They would just, eventually slow down to a crawl, and the freedom of expression we know on the Net now, would slowly (or not so slowly) disappear because no normal person or small company could afford to be "heard".

            Looney ?
            I think that sums up a good portion of it. I'll add this.

            When I first heard this was happening years ago this is how it was broken down to me. I am going to us Comcast as the point of reference because they are the biggest corporation behind this attempt to take over broadband. Comcast's theory is that broadband is too crowded and corporations need access to more broadband because they drive the economy – and because corporations can pay Comcast huge fees for better broadband. Comcast thinks that this should be a priority and private use should take a backseat. (Also my theory is that their priority is to get control of broadband so their video streaming services will rule the world.) Anyway, they think private citizens should step back to dial-up speed internet so broadband is clear for corporations do with as they please. Really what it boils down to is they want more control over broadband, so they can charge more and control more. That is why places like eBay and Netflix are fighting back against them really hard. I get something every week from eBay telling me to stand up and let my voice be heard because they know this is all about control, which means people won’t have proper access to get on their site to buy and sell things. I even received one this morning as the topic is heating up and might come to a head soon.

            A few years ago I heard of a movement that I don’t recollect the name of nor do I recall the name of the founder. I remember he was either trying to get a law passed or get a case in front of the Supreme Court. I do remember his message. He was asserting that in The United States it is illegal for any corporation to charge a citizen for broadband usage because broadband falls under the auspices of the public domain, i.e. the same reason you can’t be charged for listening to your radio. Maybe this is an attempt to curb any future legal action by “The People” with this regard. I mean they are charging people for something they legally shouldn’t be able to charge for that is going to be one heck of settlement. But I am sure corporations like Comcast have already lobbied Congress and been successful in getting such possibilities nullified. I am sure there have been stipulations put into FCC regulations that give them the control they already have. Now they want more. Sorry I can’t be more detailed, but BabylonLurker gave a pretty good summation that gives you an idea of what is happening.
            Last edited by Looney; 09-11-2014, 02:07 PM.
            Susan Ivanova, "I'll be in the car."

            Comment


            • #7
              And, as I always recommend: DO Something About What You Want!

              Go to: http://www.fcc.gov/comments

              Scroll down to 14-28 Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet and fill in the form telling them that you want internet service providers classified as common carriers.

              From what I've read, there won't be any actual slowdowns, only simulated ones and messages similar to what I posted above.

              Jan
              "As empathy spreads, civilization spreads. As empathy contracts, civilization contracts...as we're seeing now.

              Comment


              • #8
                Thank you. I understand much better.

                So, they are trying to "purchase" the broadband internet and then charge what ever they want for someone to use it.

                Like buying all of the jump gates and then charging high fees for the use of them. Yes, that's the way my mind works.

                But that seems like anti monopoly regulations already in place should prevent any corporation/entity gaining that much control over communications. Maybe they are trying to get an exemption so they can own it.


                Ok. Thank you again.
                "And what kind of head of Security would I be if I let people like me know things that I'm not supposed to know? I mean, I know what I know because I have to know it. And if I don't have to know it, I don't tell me, and I don't let anyone else tell me either. " And I can give you reasonable assurances that the head of Security will not report you for doing so."
                "Because you won't tell yourself about it?"

                "I try never to get involved in my own life, too much trouble."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Jan View Post
                  And, as I always recommend: DO Something About What You Want!

                  Go to: http://www.fcc.gov/comments

                  Scroll down to 14-28 Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet and fill in the form telling them that you want internet service providers classified as common carriers.

                  From what I've read, there won't be any actual slowdowns, only simulated ones and messages similar to what I posted above.

                  Jan
                  Jan, Thanks for the link. I will post my thoughtful comment as soon as the link to 14-28 Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet responds.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X