Net Neutrality - Take 2

Started by Sarge · 14 posts · 1,815 views

  1. #1
    FCC released draft rules today:

    The first 4 are from a 2005 statement from the FCC on net neutrality and so have been floating around for a while, if not actual rules. The last two are new ones.

    Under the draft rules, subject to reasonable network management, a provider of broadband Internet access service may not:

    1) prevent any of its users from sending or receiving the lawful content of the user's choice over the Internet;

    2) prevent any of its users from running the lawful applications or using the lawful services of the user's choice;

    3) prevent any of its users from connecting to and using on its network the user's choice of lawful devices that do not harm the network;

    4) deprive any of its users of the user's entitlement to competition among network providers, application providers, service providers, and content providers.

    5) A provider of broadband Internet access service must treat lawful content, applications, and services in a nondiscriminatory manner.

    6) A provider of broadband Internet access service must disclose such information concerning network management and other practices as is reasonably required for users and content, application, and service providers to enjoy the protections specified in this rulemaking

    http://gizmodo.com/5387619/fcc-were-going-...trality-the-law
  2. #2
    So why is all this gloom and doom nay saying about how NN is going to kill the Interwebs?
    That's where my confusion is coming from now, or is t just hype to keep the hate flowing?

    Looks reasonable to me, unless the hate is coming from the service providers... hmmmm
  3. #3
    The hate is coming from service providers and people who don't know their ass from their elbow. I am not sure I have ever heard a user opposed to NN, and certainly a gamer shoudln't be. The reality for gamers... without NN, eventually ISPs will slow gaming packets and sell an upgraded service for gamers that doesn't restrict packets.
  4. #4
    Yea Duck, it's the Service Providers who are raising a fuss. The reason is that they want to use methods to stop or slow down packets so that they do not have to spend the money to build up their network to meet demand. Which is kind of crap because SEC filings show that ISP's are making higher profits while spending less money on infrastructure.

    And I know your a union guy and I respect you are entitled to your opinion, but there is a Verizon Union rep in Dallas that went off saying that if the FCC passes this, it will cost hundreds of jobs. Which is really silly because if the ISP's have to increase capacity, it will be Capacity Analysts, Circuit Provisioners and Network Engineers filling those positions.

    So beware of what you hear from the unions on this because they seem to be touting the company line. Which is actually kind of odd......
  5. #5
    ME? Union?
    Bwaaa haaa haaa couldn't be further from the truth Atomm.
    Never been and hope to never be.

    I'm drinking the water at FOX news and there all Poo Poo on NN - it's just they were SOOOOOO anti NN it just appeared to IN YOUR FACE to think it was given at face value and realized there must be a back story not told.

    Could it be that FOX news' parent company News Corp owns a large ISP and is spreading the hate that way?

    (See Bubba the books working and I haven't even read it yet...... HA!)
  6. #6
    My apologies.... I guess I screwed that one up....

    I'm actually surprised that FoxNews is against Net Neutrality. It must be the Republican side of Fox that is taking the "Government Should Stay out of my Business" stance.....

  7. #7
    NP but for penance you get the ass less chaps next week (and you wear em backwards!)
  8. #8
    Atomm wrote:My apologies.... I guess I screwed that one up....

    I'm actually surprised that FoxNews is against Net Neutrality. It must be the Republican side of Fox that is taking the "Government Should Stay out of my Business" stance.....


    See Atomm that is not fair and a huge generalization. Most Republicans are not 100% against ALL government involvement. It is pick and choose for most. Myself, I am not that far right but middle right and I just think for a lot of things they should keep out of things.

    However, with that said, I agree with you guys on this. There does need to be Government regulation "IF" it keeps the ISP's from killing your bandwidth. I am not for censorship etc... I am not anti-government, I am anti take over everything and run it for you. There really is a huge difference. Hell I WANT the government to regulate the food industry, health industry, FDA, FCC (to a point) etc... Some regulation is not only good, but needed. I just do not want them to RUN all the industry's and tell everyone what they can and cannot do. I LOVE my SUV and do not want to have to pay off set carbon credits because it only gets 12 MPG when Gore and a lot of politicians, both sides, movie stars etc..can fly all over the place in private jets preaching to me telling me what I can drive.

    The largest problem we have in these discussions is sometimes everything is tossed into one large pot but there are many ingredients. Not everyone likes beets but they are in there you know...

    Also say what you want about Fox News but it is WAY more neutral (right leaning yes) than CNN or the other stations. At least they have shows with guests and hosts from both sides of the issues. You do not see that on, say, CNN. Not that I agree with FOX all the time either... 🙂

    I do read a lot of political blogs, sites and articles and listen to talk shows a lot. Most of the day I have various shows on. I hear stuff and get opinions of stuff most people just don't get exposed to because most media coverage is liberal or left biased, they just do not report on it. Most talk shows I listen to, the host are not huge fans of each other so I know I am getting some good mixes in there. The NYT and NPR for example.

    I also read some liberal blogs etc. to get the other sides opinions.... I really do make efforts to judge stuff on my own, one reason I do not agree with Lexx all the time, 🙂 I am centric anyway, not far right.

    Most people fall into patterns of only reading and listening to stuff that agrees with them. They do not stray out of their comfort zone so never hear details of issues etc...

    We all can argue but are probably not as far off as you think on most things. 🙂

    Anyway I think I am going to stop posting (or very minimal) on any major political issues due to hard feelings, arguments etc.. I am finding it is simply not worth getting people all fired up over my opinions.

    I really enjoy gaming with you guys and I really like you guys so there you go.... 😉
  9. #9
    Duck here is one example of the ISPs doing just wrong things to protect against NN. As I stated before Comcast took a foray into traffic shaping (I.e. not net neutrality) about 1.5 years ago. They were very quickly found out. Not only were they traffic shaping, which they are entitled to do until we have NN but they were forging rst packets, i.e. telling your computer that the host was not available when it was. This is a federal crime.

    Myself and thousand of others submitted testimony to the FCC on the ongoings. Like I said I don't download anything illeagal, it blocked my connection to my VPN. The FCC finally agreed to hold a hearing with comcast about the matter in Boston.

    Comcast reps went to Boston that morning and walked around and hired bums to pack the room. There was almost no opposition to them at the hearing because everyone there had been paid by comcast to be there, while at the same time there was a rooms worth of IT professsionals and journalists who were unable to get into the hearing. Don't take my word, look it up, you'll find it everywhere.... here is a link to the ars technica about it.

    http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2008/02...fcc-hearing.ars

    This means big money to the ISPs, but what they don't realize is that even though its big money, its an investment into their own infrastructure.

    Now, you may ask, why don't I switch providers? I live in a rural town in NH, Comcast is my ONLY high speed choice. They have an allowed monopoly and that is why I don't mind government intervention in this instance.

    http://www.savetheinternet.com/archive/200...now-the-public/
  10. #10
    Wow Bubba, that sucks. Another reason to hate Comcast. I am just on the edge of changing my TV to FiosTV. I just have not got around to it yet...

    I agree with you guys on this one... 🙂
  11. #11
    I knew Bubba and I agreed on this last year. I had comcast for a trial. 4 weeks into the trial period they blocked my VPN and sent a letter threatening a bandwidth shutoff. I had xfered 7gigabytes, my neighbor was less than one for a comparison. I forget the exact term. I was running a practice server and TS. Not a bit of the bandwidth was illegal.

    The thing that bothers me is the 'legal' wording in each rule. That opens up another can of worms, what is the end user doing to use this much bandwidth. We must look at his packets and see what they contain. Thats why I referred as to where the gov stuck its foot in the door, 'me too, me too'.


  12. #12
    Actually Paladin, in this case I was referring to the Republican Senators that sent letters to the FCC telling them they had no right doing this and the 2 Republican members of the FCC who dissented on the issue. It really wasn't a generalization in this case.

  13. #13
    Ok you folks have really made me work our my admin muscles this week. The two off topic posts by Doc and Duck have been moved to the closed and derailed NN1 thread.

    Guys, I request 2 things from you all now

    1.) Let keep this thread on topic, its important to all of us. Not have NN will have the most affect on gamers, I think its important people see our voices when they have questions about it like Duck did.

    2.) Lets stay out of the politics game for a while. We all know the other peoples opinions and while I don't question the merit of debate and while I would like to be able to debate political things here with you all (my friends), it has not served any of us well in the recent past. Once we have all grown a little more and can have arguments without personal offense, then maybe we can restore political talk. I am NOT saying we can't talk about NN, but lets keep the partisan politics out of it. Atomm and Sarge may overrule me on all this, but for now this is the law. I will close threads. There will be no more critiques of news sources on either side, again we know how each other feels, time to give up on it.

    Back to NN
  14. #14
    Atomm wrote:Actually Paladin, in this case I was referring to the Republican Senators that sent letters to the FCC telling them they had no right doing this and the 2 Republican members of the FCC who dissented on the issue. It really wasn't a generalization in this case.


    Well all I can say is they are idiots! See we can agree 🙂