Release List Reviews Shop Join News DVD Giveaways Video Games Advertise
DVD Reviews | Theatrical Reviews | Price Search Buy Stuff Here
DVD Talk
DVD Reviews DVD Talk Headlines HD Reviews


Add to My Yahoo! - RSS 2.0 - RSS 2.0 - DVD Talk Podcast RSS -


Go Back   DVD Talk Forum > General Discussions > Other Talk > Religion, Politics and World Events

Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-04-09, 11:59 AM   #26
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,176
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

That will not keep the newspapers in business. That may be what they hope, but it won't. The internet will still be instant, compared to reading the history papers the next day.

But the administration must find a way to keep their media alive.
__________________
“The illegality of cannabis is outrageous, an impediment to full utilization of a drug which helps produce the serenity and insight, sensitivity and fellowship so desperately needed in this increasingly mad and dangerous world.”

― Carl Sagan
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-09, 12:02 PM   #27
DVD Talk Ruler
 
General Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Where it all happens - SoCal
Posts: 19,886
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

Quote:
Originally Posted by kvrdave View Post
That will not keep the newspapers in business. That may be what they hope, but it won't. The internet will still be instant, compared to reading the history papers the next day.

But the administration must find a way to keep their media alive.
Yeah I meant in the on-line sense not the actual paper. Most newspapers are dying because they haven't figure out a good way to generate revenue on-line. This would solve that.
__________________
"Kneel Before Zod"
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 10:35 AM   #28
DVD Talk Legend
 
wishbone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 18,966
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

Quote:
U.S. court rules against FCC on ‘Net neutrality’
Ruling is setback for agency's push for national broadband plan

AP 4/6/2010

WASHINGTON - A federal appeals court has ruled that the Federal Communications Commission lacks the authority to require broadband providers to give equal treatment to all Internet traffic flowing over their networks.

Tuesday's ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is a big victory for Comcast Corp., the nation's largest cable company. It had challenged the FCC's authority to impose so called "Net neutrality" obligations.

It marks a serious setback for the FCC, which needs authority to regulate the Internet in order to push ahead with key parts of its massive national broadband plan.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36193558...ence-security/

So how serious of a setback is this for the FCC? I imagine they will appeal the ruling.
__________________
"Wishbone is spelled with an E not a 3..... *Be gone*" - Minor Threat
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 10:47 AM   #29
DVD Talk Legend
 
Dr Mabuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 75 clicks above the Do Lung bridge...
Posts: 18,950
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

Comcast is a powerful monopoly and they have the advantage of allying themselves with the entrenched telco lobby.

When the combined efforts, resources, and legal teams of Microsoft, Amazon, Ebay, Google, Yahoo, Facebook, MySpace, etc, were beaten in court repeatedly by the 'tiered internet' group years back I think some of the naive people learned what they were up against.

American citizens may be stupid enough to buy the propaganda of the tiered internet model, well hell in fact most aren't even aware this is going and aren't intelligent enough to understand it if they were, but other major nations are aware and have passed Net Neutrality laws.

I don't like this setback, it is serious, but I hope the FCC will plow ahead and get this done. The tiered model would change the internet in ways few can understand.
__________________

"We're all going to die, all of us, what a circus! That alone should make us love each other but it doesn't. We are terrorized and flattened by trivialities, we are eaten up by nothing." - Charles Bukowski
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 11:14 AM   #30
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Hoboken, NJ
Posts: 3,068
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Mabuse View Post
I don't like this setback, it is serious, but I hope the FCC will plow ahead and get this done. The tiered model would change the internet in ways few can understand.
I'm going to add you to that list

The EFF has been very wary of Net Neutrality as it has been currently proposed. I don't believe they have any reason to schill for Comcast et al.

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/09...ls-and-promise
__________________
"The great virtue of a free market system is that it does not care what color people are; it does not care what their religion is; it only cares whether they can produce something you want to buy. It is the most effective system we have discovered to enable people who hate one another to deal with one another and help one another." - Milton Friedman
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 11:35 AM   #31
DVD Talk Legend
 
Sean O'Hara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vichy America
Posts: 13,269
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

Quote:
Originally Posted by wishbone View Post
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36193558...ence-security/

So how serious of a setback is this for the FCC? I imagine they will appeal the ruling.
Sounds to me like they need Congress to give them authority before they can do anything. That's the way things should be -- the legislative branch makes the rules, and the executive carries them out.
__________________
Goodnight, everyone. Tomorrow will be worse.
Blog
Twitter
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 12:13 PM   #32
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: in da cloud
Posts: 26,196
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Mabuse View Post
Comcast is a powerful monopoly and they have the advantage of allying themselves with the entrenched telco lobby.

When the combined efforts, resources, and legal teams of Microsoft, Amazon, Ebay, Google, Yahoo, Facebook, MySpace, etc, were beaten in court repeatedly by the 'tiered internet' group years back I think some of the naive people learned what they were up against.

American citizens may be stupid enough to buy the propaganda of the tiered internet model, well hell in fact most aren't even aware this is going and aren't intelligent enough to understand it if they were, but other major nations are aware and have passed Net Neutrality laws.

I don't like this setback, it is serious, but I hope the FCC will plow ahead and get this done. The tiered model would change the internet in ways few can understand.
is it legal for congress to pass a law that imposes a cost on a company in order to provide greater profits for another company?
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 12:31 PM   #33
X
Administrator
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1987
Location: AA-
Posts: 10,546
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post
is it legal for congress to pass a law that imposes a cost on a company in order to provide greater profits for another company?
They just passed a law that imposes a cost on on companies (and individuals!) in order to provide greater profits for several other companies.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 12:35 PM   #34
DVD Talk Legend
 
nevermind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Illinoyze
Posts: 10,514
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

Quote:
Originally Posted by X View Post
They just passed a law that imposes a cost on on companies (and individuals!) in order to provide greater profits for several other companies.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 12:48 PM   #35
DVD Talk Legend
 
Dr Mabuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 75 clicks above the Do Lung bridge...
Posts: 18,950
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Birrman54 View Post
I'm going to add you to that list

The EFF has been very wary of Net Neutrality as it has been currently proposed. I don't believe they have any reason to schill for Comcast et al.

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/09...ls-and-promise
Well... the history of this goes back a lot farther than 2005, to the now famous 'our pipes' sentiments of an executive VP with Bellsouth. If you knew that history and what happened, you might understand why the FCC stepped in. Here's a hint... it's part of that 'combined efforts of Amazon, Google' stuff I was talking about above that lead to the FCC stuff in 2005.

This did not start as some 'power play' or grab by the FCC, quite the opposite in fact. An exec VP with Bellsouth said that Amazon paying millions a month for bandwidth at a speed, and customers paying money every month for bandwidth at a speed was not enough. There should be a third charge for the privilege of sending content across the internet off of those connections. It would make them more money, which they wanted. If you didn't pay for priority traffic, your content could slow to a crawl. This is the tiered model. It would allow those with the infrastructure to charge any rate they wanted to for prioritized traffic.

While that article does raise some legit questions, it's by no means a comprehensive understanding of the issues. If the FCC doesn't do it, it will not get done at this point. While any wise person might anticipate problems with that, and they should, it's a hell of a lot better than letting Comcast and AT&T run the freaking internet. That's the other option. The actual free and open traffic model is the original model of the internet, the way it's worked since day one. If you can afford a 1.5 meg internet connection, you can send or receive data on that link at that speed. If you are Amazon and you pay for OC-12/48 fiber trunks and the like, you can send or receive data at that speed.

The new version of Youtube would have you pay to upload, and pay to view each video. So the real Youtube would close, pretty quick. One of the telco giants would open their own version of course. Server farms that host sites like DVDTalk would go out of business, no way they could afford the overhead to get decent traffic priority. The cost of web hosting would go up, probably way up. That's okay, because the rich can afford it and could consolidate, something they love to do anyway. But to a person looking to launch a new e-commerce business? Forget it. You simply could not compete with the large wealthy sites.

Like I said, not a lot of people that understand the issue here. But there are some. You can see some of the propaganda has worked on those that don't understand the issue here in the last few posts. A common sight to see.
__________________

"We're all going to die, all of us, what a circus! That alone should make us love each other but it doesn't. We are terrorized and flattened by trivialities, we are eaten up by nothing." - Charles Bukowski
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 01:21 PM   #36
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: in da cloud
Posts: 26,196
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

Quote:
Originally Posted by X View Post
They just passed a law that imposes a cost on on companies (and individuals!) in order to provide greater profits for several other companies.

in this case they worked out a deal with everyone to pass the health bill. and from what i've read the premiums for the sick people aren't going to be less than what they are now.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 01:59 PM   #37
DVD Talk Legend
 
Dr Mabuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 75 clicks above the Do Lung bridge...
Posts: 18,950
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

I was just reading this article on the decisions, thought I'd post it here. It topically covers the issue.

It does not cover the power and control aspects of the tiered internet - that it would allow Comcast and AT&T to close VOIP, except the version it offered, that kind of thing. This would affect many companies who use VOIP to reduce costs. That's an angle many people just don't seem to realize. It would stifle new inventions, forget Twitter, EBAY, Amazon, etc, that kind of innovation would cease. No one could get it started, except the giant telcos. I have founded and built statewide ISPs, forget that, no way I could do it again with the tiered model. Smaller regional and local ISPs that compete with the giants will close because they will have to charge so much for access. The telcos then set prices for access with no competition. The telcos can simply choose where you are 'allowed' to go on the internet, and just block high bandwidth sites. Internet Brand's business model would fail. I could go on, hopefully you get the idea.

Quote:
Comcast Routs the FCC: RIP Net Neutrality (and BitTorrents)
By Steven James Snyder on April 6, 2010

Net neutrality. There are two sorts of Americans: Those who not only know the term, but have been closely monitoring the ongoing Net neutrality debate, and those who have no idea what I'm talking about.

But the decision today by a federal appeals court, which slapped down the FCC and dealt a major blow to Net neutrality advocates, might just be the headline that gets mainstream America to start paying attention.

Net neutrality essentially means the status quo. When you, the home internet user, currently turn on your computer and log online, you have paid an Internet service provider a certain amount of money for unrestricted access. You search what you want to search, stream whatever audio or video you wish. For those who no longer pay for their music - or movies or television - you saddle up to your BitTorrents and download whatever it is that you are pirating for the evening. This is all advocates mean when they say Net neutrality: All web traffic is treated equally by your service provider.

Some have even compared it to online free speech, where there is no online censoring or obstruction of web traffic.

But as online media has become richer and richer, and the spread of BitTorrents and web video has exploded, web service providers have started thinking about how to regulate traffic. Or at least how to charge more for those users who download the most data. Companies like Comcast say that resources are being drained by these top users, and a couple of years ago Comcast started taking measures to slow down and hamper BitTorrents transfers. Users would go to do something online, and suddenly discover that Comcast had closed that particular gate.

In August of 2008, the Federal Communications Commission created something of a precedent by issuing a cease and desist order against the company. Just as the FCC has presided over the world of telecommunications, they had long been making moves to assert an array of Net neutrality rules and standards. And this move against Comcast - ordering them to remove any and all restrictions to BitTorrents - represented a firm declaration, that the FCC intended to monitor the Internet as well.

Now most Net neutrality conversations tend to revolve around freedom of speech or free enterprise. The passionate advocates for Net neutrality see the web as the ultimate space of unimpeded, unchecked, unregulated discourse. But Net neutrality critics typically point to the fact that Internet service providers are private companies, and should be able to conduct business however they see fit. It's this last argument - along with the issue of pornography - that has caused consternation for many conservative politicians, who are supposed to be pro-business, pro-family as well as pro-individual rights. Some Republicans side with the corporations, as others are eager to regulate porn. Libertarians, meanwhile, believe in unregulated markets.

The political debate surrounding the issue has grown so heated that Congress has basically thrown up its hands – or stuck its head in the sand – rejecting five different bills in 2006 alone that would have empowered the FCC to police Net neutrality infractions. (More at Techland: 8 Netbooks Worth Buying Right Now)

Congress has thus far refused to act, so 2008 marked the year when the FCC took a stand on its own. And today's unananimous decision by a three-judge appeals panel to toss out the FCC's order, has not only taken the Net neutrality issue back to square one but has also sparked wider questions as to the FCC's authority in regulating web commerce. "The Commission may exercise this 'ancillary' authority only if it demonstrates that its action - here barring Comcast from interfering with its customers' use of peer-to-peer networking applications - is 'reasonably ancillary to the . . . effective performance of its statutorily mandated responsibilities,'" the court said. "The Commission has failed to make that showing."

What does that jargon mean? That the FCC has no real mandate to regulate the web, that its order against Comcast is beyond its authority, and then even something like the recently announced National Broadband Plan is now likely dead in the water. As part of that plan, the FCC was setting out to bridge the socioeconomic technological divide by expanding broadband in poor and rural communities, using money from the federal fund that subsidizes telephone service in those areas. Today's court case effectively deems that plan to be beyond the FCC mandate.
So why should you care?

Well, for anyone who enjoys a good BitTorrent before dinner, here's betting that you'll soon notice slower downloads if you use Comcast - and most likely from other service providers as well. You'll hear a lot of rumblings from Congress, about the importance of finally weighing in on the debate – though the poisoned well from the health care debate may run deep under this issue as well. The FCC could appeal the decision to the Supreme Court, though its quite uncertain that the high court would agree to hear the case, nor how they would fall on the Net neutrality issue. (Many Net neutrality advocates actually believe that a 2005 Supreme Court decision, which upheld the FCC's deregulation of broadband, already gave too much freedom and control to the Internet service providers).

And then there are those who see a tiered Internet culture rapidly approaching on the horizon. Imagine a scenario in which your Internet access paralleled your access to cable television. For your basic fee, you get access to most basic web sites. But now Comcast can restrict which sites you access, and could charge a premium rate for premium access.

I, for one, think this scenario isn't just possible, but likely. Providers have been fighting for some time to create preferential pricing models, to get the more aggressive Internet users to pay more for unlimited data. And after Tuesday's decision, if I was in charge of Comcast, I'd already be devising ways to divvy up access, brainstorming how to squeeze more bucks out of more users. You want YouTube? Then order tier 2. Hulu? Tier 3? BitTorrents? Tier 4.

Forget philosophy or ideals; in an unregulated market, it just makes good business sense.
__________________

"We're all going to die, all of us, what a circus! That alone should make us love each other but it doesn't. We are terrorized and flattened by trivialities, we are eaten up by nothing." - Charles Bukowski
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 05:01 PM   #38
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: So Cal
Posts: 7,073
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

Big companies have been terrified of the Internet since day one. The early days of AOL pretty much spelled doom for the company because it was trying to control content and access, and even their unlimited-service model was massively overpriced. They began a swift downward slide towards utter annihilation, much like Apple's never ending efforts to control the PC market.

VOIP was the last straw for the big telecom firms. Their precious telecom monopoly was being threatened by ingenuity and innovation, so they did the typically American thing: bought Congress. Now even cell companies are threatening rate hikes because of the possibility of VOIP and Skype over their 3G networks.

This is pretty much the end of the Internet if Congress doesn't act now. It means when you come on this forum, you're not going to see embedded videos anymore, and half the time links won't be accessible. The tiered model is ultimately self-destructive because no one can control the Internet - or the PC market, no matter how hard they try.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 05:17 PM   #39
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,176
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

It is surprising how little people know about it. But if porn were hard to come by, we'd start to care.
__________________
“The illegality of cannabis is outrageous, an impediment to full utilization of a drug which helps produce the serenity and insight, sensitivity and fellowship so desperately needed in this increasingly mad and dangerous world.”

― Carl Sagan
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 05:39 PM   #40
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: So Cal
Posts: 7,073
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

It's been huge news for years now. I remember reading about all the big internet companies who didn't want to go under. I guess this is a good thing for B&M retailers if Amazo, Hulu, iTunes, and Youtube go down. People will buy books and DVDs again.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 06:55 PM   #41
Time Lord
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 51,992
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

I agree with Dr. Mabuse. Net Neutrality is a huge deal. Without it, our web browsing will feel a lot like China, except it will be private corporations blocking links, not the government.

Edit--The FCC has issued a response to the ruling:

Quote:
Originally Posted by FCC
The FCC is firmly committed to promoting an open Internet and to policies that will bring the enormous benefits of broadband to all Americans. It will rest these policies -- all of which will be designed to foster innovation and investment while protecting and empowering consumers -- on a solid legal foundation.
Today's court decision invalidated the prior Commission's approach to preserving an open Internet. But the Court in no way disagreed with the importance of preserving a free and open Internet; nor did it close the door to other methods for achieving this important end.
__________________
“Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”
Check out my vinyl collection!

Last edited by Supermallet; 04-06-10 at 07:20 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 07:33 PM   #42
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 12,146
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

A while ago, I said I favored net neutrality because I figured - if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

But I have since changed my mind. I now oppose net neutrality.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 08:24 PM   #43
Time Lord
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 51,992
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

Why?
__________________
“Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”
Check out my vinyl collection!
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 10:44 PM   #44
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
BKenn01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Big Blue Nation!
Posts: 4,496
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

Quote:
Originally Posted by grundle View Post
A while ago, I said I favored net neutrality because I figured - if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

But I have since changed my mind. I now oppose net neutrality.
So you like the idea of paying additonal costs that will be passed onto you by corporate America?
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-10, 07:53 AM   #45
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Formerly known as "orangecrush18" - still legal though
Posts: 13,846
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

The only problem I see with net neutrality is that the tiering of internet service (as described in this thread) hasn't really happened as far as I can tell. I think the bigger problem is that most cities only have 1 or 2 choices for high speed internet. Here, you either get cable or DSL.
__________________
Everyone else is bound to leave, but you.
And they swear their love is real;
They mean, I like the way you make me feel.

gamertag: IAMNOTwiththem
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-10, 09:58 AM   #46
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
xmiyux's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: WV
Posts: 9,903
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangecrush View Post
The only problem I see with net neutrality is that the tiering of internet service (as described in this thread) hasn't really happened as far as I can tell. I think the bigger problem is that most cities only have 1 or 2 choices for high speed internet. Here, you either get cable or DSL.
Same here. Cable or DSL are your two choices and there is only one speed available which depends on how close you are to a relay. I have called my DSL company and have been happy to pay more for a faster connection... it simply isn't available.
__________________
I'm nostalgic for conversations I had yesterday. I've begun reminiscing events before they even occur. I'm reminiscing this right now. I can't go to the bar because I've already looked back on it in my memory... and I didn't have a good time.

Live gamertag: xmiyux
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-10, 10:15 AM   #47
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Hoboken, NJ
Posts: 3,068
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

So when we talk about corporations buying government, the solution is to give government more authority? To give people like Ted Stevens & Hank Johnson more control over it? Why on earth do we expect this to help? This is the same FCC that is wholly-owned by Clear Channel, and spends the majority of its time defending established corporate interests.

You all realize that Google is larger than AT&T, right? That they're already looking to expand into wired and wireless internet services anyway? Google isn't even alone - new LTE satellite networks are being launched by companies completely independent of the traditional providers. Why do you think AT&T or Verizon will respond to this competition by alienating their customer base with more fees and limited access?

As soon as any ISP begins to limit internet services, because of throttling or blocking or whatever, they will lose market share. Their blocks will be subverted by proxy servers and other packet tricks. To imagine that without net neutrality ALL ISPs will collude to completely destroy free speech on the internet is laughably conspiratorial.
__________________
"The great virtue of a free market system is that it does not care what color people are; it does not care what their religion is; it only cares whether they can produce something you want to buy. It is the most effective system we have discovered to enable people who hate one another to deal with one another and help one another." - Milton Friedman
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-10, 10:21 AM   #48
DVD Talk Legend
 
Dr Mabuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 75 clicks above the Do Lung bridge...
Posts: 18,950
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

Like I said... most people simply aren't able to understand the issues here.
__________________

"We're all going to die, all of us, what a circus! That alone should make us love each other but it doesn't. We are terrorized and flattened by trivialities, we are eaten up by nothing." - Charles Bukowski
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-10, 10:34 AM   #49
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,176
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

I do think that if Comcast wins, there will be an innovative solution. Though it may take several years.
__________________
“The illegality of cannabis is outrageous, an impediment to full utilization of a drug which helps produce the serenity and insight, sensitivity and fellowship so desperately needed in this increasingly mad and dangerous world.”

― Carl Sagan
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-10, 11:01 AM   #50
DVD Talk Legend
 
Dr Mabuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 75 clicks above the Do Lung bridge...
Posts: 18,950
re: FCC to enact "Net Neutrality" [UPDATE: NOT!]

The big players in this are Comcast, AT&T, Time Warner, and Verizon. the long-throw fiber carriers that make up the bulk of the 'big rectangle' in what is the internet in the US..

Comcast just happened to be the name on this particular matter.

It would be very, vary hard to get past the long-throw fiber carriers to do anything innovative. Easements, legal issues, massive cost of building new infrastructure from scratch. Unique 'new' or 'second' internet protocols that would route traffic only on a new inter-state rectangle of fiber. Getting that service to the home, you're back to easements again, with huge legal issues.

This is such an important matter, that so few actually understand. I hate that these corrupt peabrained fucks ever tried to take over the internet. That is what resulted in the FCC getting involved, but at this point all we can hope for is the FCC. The massive resources of Microsoft and the other large companies I mentioned above were swatted down like flies by the long-entrenched power of the telco lobby in Washington.
__________________

"We're all going to die, all of us, what a circus! That alone should make us love each other but it doesn't. We are terrorized and flattened by trivialities, we are eaten up by nothing." - Charles Bukowski
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:37 PM.


Copyright 2011 DVDTalk.com All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0