FCC approved net neutrality
12-23-2010, 09:14 AM
#1
Administrator
Thread Starter
FCC approved net neutrality
Not sure how many people saw this the other day...
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/12/...ex.html?hpt=T1
Whats does everyone think about it? I'm glad it passed!
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/12/...ex.html?hpt=T1
(CNN) -- The Federal Communications Commission on Tuesday approved "high-level rules of the road" designed to ensure that internet providers grant everyone equal access to the Web.
But the 3-2 vote immediately came under attack from both flanks, with internet-freedom advocates saying the new rules don't go far enough and critics saying the government should stay out of online business altogether.
In announcing the proposed rules this month, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said they would require high-speed internet providers to treat all types of Web content equally.
The rules are designed to, in effect, keep the companies that own the internet's real-world infrastructure from slowing down some types of websites or apps -- say, those belonging to a competitor -- or speeding up others for high-paying clients.
Read more by clicking link...
But the 3-2 vote immediately came under attack from both flanks, with internet-freedom advocates saying the new rules don't go far enough and critics saying the government should stay out of online business altogether.
In announcing the proposed rules this month, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said they would require high-speed internet providers to treat all types of Web content equally.
The rules are designed to, in effect, keep the companies that own the internet's real-world infrastructure from slowing down some types of websites or apps -- say, those belonging to a competitor -- or speeding up others for high-paying clients.
Read more by clicking link...
Whats does everyone think about it? I'm glad it passed!
12-23-2010, 09:28 AM
#2
Administrator
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɯooɹpǝq ɹnoʎ
Posts: 13,943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vehicle: ǝdnoɔ sısǝuǝƃ
Initially I'm glad... but at the same time, I hope they're very careful in the future. I also hope it doesn't tie their hands for instances like WikiLeaks, where Amazon (the provider of services) shut down the site to prevent their other servers from being overloaded as a result of the attacks.
Overall,
but I'm weary
Overall,
but I'm weary
12-23-2010, 11:54 AM
#3
Super Moderator
The devil's in the details. If they are allowed, the bureaucrats will F up the Internet bad enough to have to limit bandwidth so everybody can have their fair share. Then some sites will be more equal than others. 
.gov needs to leave the internet alone.
.gov needs to leave the internet alone.
12-23-2010, 01:11 PM
#4
Moderator
I'm supprised the government had to step in and say that nothing is going to change.....
Back in the 60s the government introduced ARPAnet. ARPAnet is pretty much what started the internet. It grew bigger and bigger and now we all use the same standards. A slight change to the OSI model was implemented. We now use a 7 layer OSI model as opposed to ARPAnet's 4 layer model, but that does not affect much as far as the internet goes. But even back in the 60s each piece of traffic across the ARPAnet was treated equally. same in the 70's 80's 90's 00's and now here we are in the 10's...
After about 50 years of service, the government has stated that we won't change anything... WAY TO GO TAX DOLLARS!!!
There should be no regulation of data priority. That would in essence allow companies like AT&T and others who control the internet backbone fiber lines to say, "Because you pay me, you can speak freely and others who don't will have to wait until you're done". Net neutrality is the natural order of the internet. A path is created between machines, data is transferred, the path is closed or kept open for more data. Allowing non-net-neutrality would involve making others wait for connections. This would also encourage those companies who have outdated data transmission capabilities to charge more to those who really want internet service.
Without Net Neutrality Mom and Pop ISP can claim that their services are over-burdened and they must charge even more for those who want more service rather then just upgrade their lines.
Back in the 60s the government introduced ARPAnet. ARPAnet is pretty much what started the internet. It grew bigger and bigger and now we all use the same standards. A slight change to the OSI model was implemented. We now use a 7 layer OSI model as opposed to ARPAnet's 4 layer model, but that does not affect much as far as the internet goes. But even back in the 60s each piece of traffic across the ARPAnet was treated equally. same in the 70's 80's 90's 00's and now here we are in the 10's...
After about 50 years of service, the government has stated that we won't change anything... WAY TO GO TAX DOLLARS!!!
There should be no regulation of data priority. That would in essence allow companies like AT&T and others who control the internet backbone fiber lines to say, "Because you pay me, you can speak freely and others who don't will have to wait until you're done". Net neutrality is the natural order of the internet. A path is created between machines, data is transferred, the path is closed or kept open for more data. Allowing non-net-neutrality would involve making others wait for connections. This would also encourage those companies who have outdated data transmission capabilities to charge more to those who really want internet service.
Without Net Neutrality Mom and Pop ISP can claim that their services are over-burdened and they must charge even more for those who want more service rather then just upgrade their lines.
Every one knows Al Gore invented the internet 
12-23-2010, 10:45 PM
#7
Moderator
Fun fact: the first three characters sent across the network which spawned the Internet were LOL. How can you regulate something like that?
The characters were "login" but the system crashed after the first two characters and after reset they sent login again... Oddly Microsoft was not to blame for the crash.
The characters were "login" but the system crashed after the first two characters and after reset they sent login again... Oddly Microsoft was not to blame for the crash.