So, how long before Bush kills Net Neutrality because AT&T slipped Rove a few mil?RppPolyp at [url=http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/04/22.html#a8003]Crooks and Liars[/url] wrote:Good to see this up and posted here because I was beginning to feel this thing was going to get passed in the dark of the night.
Kids, in any other medium, this would be called payola - pay us to get the Gucci transmission lines. People already pay sweetly for bandwidth, now they want to frisk folks for more.
How about this: every software company that has web sites and provide content for the internet who will be shaked down by this shit should revoke every license these middleman telecom companies have to run their office software, their servers and so on then turn around and charge them say, a million a server or PC to run said software. Meanwhile companies will spout up who will not frisk folks for the extra priviledge of not getting shoved through a dial up line who will finally bust the monopolies of these assholes.
Let's see them have to "pay for it" because as they say "the internet isn't free." Oh, by the way, what patents do ATT&T, Verizon and so on ahve on the interwebs?
RppPolyp | 04.22.06 - 12:26 pm | #
Net Neutrality in Layman's Terms
Moderator: Thanas
-
Einhander Sn0m4n
- Insane Railgunner
- Posts: 18630
- Joined: 2002-10-01 05:51am
- Location: Louisiana... or Dagobah. You know, where Yoda lives.
Net Neutrality in Layman's Terms
MyDD Dot Net
Disclaimer: I work for Verizon, this message should not be considered an official statement by the company or its interests.
To the best of my knowledge, the ISPs who are opposed to legislated network neutrality will continue to provide their same service level that exists now, but might give certain types of traffic priority through their own networks (probably for a fee). I don't see the ISPs deliberately throttling down existing traffic - the last time an ISP tried that there was much consumer backlash and said ISP backed down.
Various ISPs also argue that market forces will ensure fair service even without network neutrality legislation - consumers will probably jump ship if their ISP is providing poor service to favored sites.
To the best of my knowledge, the ISPs who are opposed to legislated network neutrality will continue to provide their same service level that exists now, but might give certain types of traffic priority through their own networks (probably for a fee). I don't see the ISPs deliberately throttling down existing traffic - the last time an ISP tried that there was much consumer backlash and said ISP backed down.
Various ISPs also argue that market forces will ensure fair service even without network neutrality legislation - consumers will probably jump ship if their ISP is providing poor service to favored sites.