Bill would rewrite antitrust law to prohibit network operators from "prioritizing" Internet content or services. Unlike other efforts, this one actually started to go somewhere during the last Congress.
Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.
Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.
Recent posts on technology, trends, and more.
Add this feed to your online news reader
The whole tech industry should be against this. It is not a good idea to allow government regulation of the internet. As soon as it gets out of hand, science and entrepreneurship will be put in the backseat because lobbying will become the single most important aspect of building a business plan. As we all know, only the big companies can afford lobbyists, so the small companies will suffer.
As usual, this is 100% in the wrong direction for Liberals/Socialists/Democrats. The unintended side effects will be a disaster. But instead of admitting mistakes, the Liberals/Socialists/Democrats will just create more laws to "help" people screwed by this - all shaped by lobbyists. Soon, we'll have a patchwork of laws that will require all sorts of lawyers to figure out.
Oh well, so much for the startup!
Open your mouths and help shut this down.
I've seen through it, everyone else I know has seen through it, and so has basically everyone else in the world except for idiots like you.
Comcast wasn't doing 'network management' with their Bittorrent thing: they were fradulently breaking connections at all times of the day, congested internet or not.
Now, I would understand if they would limit my connections to the internet or slow down my connection..... but NOT forge reset packets like they were doing, just to get me to use THEIR services.
Comcast made it VERY apparent why we need 'net neutrality' legislation and some regulation of ISP's and other internet companies.
If Comcast gets bad enough, then more competition will come online. If the government gets involved, then the lobbyists will be deciding who wins and loses.
Come back to Earth, take a deep breath and think through the ramifications of opening the internet to the government.
Everyone complains about the telcos and wireless. Do you realize that some of the issues are directly related to how the government regulates these organizations??? Then people complain when the lobbyists or paid-off congressmen get involved. Well surprise, more government hurts us all. We need to be real careful about how much government we let in.
Pressure can be put in Comcast in all sorts of ways; growing government regulation should be a last resort.
Net Neutrality is not 'crap'. The only people who say that it is are people who work for these companies and have a hidden motive (usually planning on toll lanes on the internet and express lanes on the internet).
What is wrong with managing their network? We all want more bandwidth because a) there isn't enough and b) we'll just need more. Who is going to pay for it? Many engineers go to school for network management and companies like Cisco specialize in network management. It is an integral part of any business when there are limited resources and unequal demand. We all benefit from these companies abilities to squeeze as much usage out of every line.
I see that Comcast is looking at overage charges. That may just take care of it and then we don't need this "Net Neutrality" bs.
Network management is good. "Net Neutrality" is just a result of the Socialist tendencies to take over successful endeavors. It's so obvious because all of the ingredients are in place: a) a villain (Comcast), b) a solution requiring Liberals (government), and c) ignoring any contrary facts or unintended side-effects. I don't see the supports of Net Neutrality ever talk about any potential unintended or destructive side-effects. I don't find this strange because they want control and they really don't care about the users.
Back to Comcast's overage trial-balloons: it won't be enough because the Liberals want control. They will find any and every way possible to tear the idea apart.
I love it when they tell us natural market mechanisms will protect us and how regulation will cost us more and stifle innovation. Meanwhile, they are looking in their closet to see if their lubrication collection is big enough for what they want to do to us.
I can understand the desire to prohibit blocking, etc. (but even this is best left to market mechanisms--businesses that abuse their customers don't tend to fare well), but to outlaw positive things (like better quality of service) is ridiculous.
I can see the Big Brother posters already: "Offer faster service, go to jail." Surely this will be followed by federal agents making telecom execs do the perp walk for offering faster video downloads.
I can understand the desire to prohibit blocking, etc. (but even this is best left to market mechanisms--businesses that abuse their customers don't tend to fare well), but to outlaw positive things (like better quality of service) is ridiculous.
I can see the Big Brother posters already: "Offer faster service, go to jail." Surely this will be followed by federal agents making telecom execs do the perp walk for offering faster video downloads.
It was the radio industry that went to the government and said we want you, the government, to assign exclusive frequencies to us so others don't interfer with our broadcasts. You know the rest of the story.
- by benjaminstraight July 16, 2008 4:28 PM PDT
- How complicated.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(13 Comments)