 
Matt621
@bellsouth.net | Wake up America.... Shades of what is to come to America if the the Replublicans get their way..... | |
|  | 
redxii
too big to fail
Premium,Mod
join:2001-02-26
Austin, TX | Re: Wake up America.... Republican.. Democrat.. we all know it is full of old farts who couldn't care about anything other than the ability to raise their own 6 figure salary. Naturally when they do that they love raising taxes... | |
| | | squid7
Premium
join:2006-09-02 | Re: Wake up America.... They're all whores in DC...every one of them. | |
| | | 
karlmarx
join:2006-09-18
Nashua, NH
 ·Fairpoint Communic..
| Worried? You should be This is exactly what we will see in the US if we don't pass net neutrality laws NOW. This is about the incumbent megacorps abusing their power.
This is "claiming that the Internet TV causes too much traffic on the Internet line."
That is TOTAL BULLCRAP.
"Also, as many of them operate cable TV networks as well, the companies are afraid that the success of HanaTV will eat into their profits from the cable business."
The megacorps are just plain GREEDY. The net neutrality laws WILL be passed in the next congress, as soon as all the fat cat republican scum are thrown out of office. Net Neutrality WILL prevent Verizon, Comcast, etc from blocking any access from any service. Net Neutrality guarantees an upstart company has the RIGHT to compete in the free market.
--
Stick it to the MAN. Support your local torrent sites. Proudly providing 10mb of upstream for all your TV, Movie, and MP3 needs. | |
| | chemaupr
join:2005-06-06
Alexandria, VA | Re: Worried? You should be who did not see these coming? Want prove that some level of regulation is needed. here it is. sure is not here, but the korean network is more developed and evolved than ours, once we get close to their level, well history will it repeat. | |
| | 
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| said by karlmarx  :Net Neutrality WILL prevent Verizon, Comcast, etc from blocking any access from any service. Net Neutrality guarantees an upstart company has the RIGHT to compete in the free market. All the evidence needed to determine that your full of crap. You'll pass the flawed regulation and hold it up as your banner; then when the cracks begin to appear you'll blame fat cat republican interference. Furthermore when anyone steps in to try to fix it you'll tell everyone that that person is trying to hurt the poor. Either way your side can't lose because of our pain-averse and short-sighted society. It's the same BS that's been going on for years.
At least they've taught you well, capitalizing the words you did to inflame the idiot masses who can't be bothered to spend more than a second to question your motives, or the potential side effects of what you preach.
--
Early to rise, early to bed;
Makes a man healthy but socially dead. | |
| 
viperpa33s
Why Me?
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Bradenton, FL
 ·Bright House
| Blame Game said by Matt621 :
Shades of what is to come to America if the the Republicans get their way.....
It don't matter whether your Democrat or Republican, many in both parties voted against Net Neutrality. So don't play the blame game that only one party is responsible. Don't say that more Republicans voted against it than Democrats, it don't matter.
We will see how it all plays out after the elections. You will see the Democrats voting against Net Neutrality if they get concessions in there favor which won't be in favor of the consumer as a whole. | |
| | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Blame Game Actually, it tied in the committee vote that tried to make the law actually enforceable. Right along party lines. So the amendment failed. Then they voted on a useless version of the law, and that's the one that some Dems voted down... and rightful so, because without the original amendment it was useless legislation. | |
| | | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Easy solution for both content & access providers ... That's fine. Or they can just raise the fees that they charge everyone for the service they provide. What they should not be able to do is charge companies that they're NOT providing service to. Which is what it's all about. Everyone pays for the bandwidth they use now. If the companies want to charge more than they're free to do so. But don't try to charge companies that you DON'T provide service to and access fee to deliver content to the ISP's customers that were requested by the customer. That's rubbish. | |
| |
karlmarx
join:2006-09-18
Nashua, NH
·Fairpoint Communic..
| If your idea is so smart, why don't ANY providers actually do that? I mean, you would so like to see charging by the byte, but if I pay by the byte, then I only pay for bytes I specifically request. That means no pop-ups, no banners, no ads, no spam, no nothing. I get only exactly what I want, because otherwise, the ISP is ripping me off. It's not MY fault I use over 1000GB/month. I am paying for a PIPE to the internet, and I can use it as I see fit. If they want to charge me more than 35.00 for a 10/10 connection, then they should. Oh, WAIT, I get my internet access from my town owned utility! I guess the taxpayers are subsidizing me! Haha!
--
Stick it to the MAN. Support your local torrent sites. Proudly providing 10mb of upstream for all your TV, Movie, and MP3 needs. | |
| | |
AnonDOG
 from:
LiamJunket
| Re: Easy solution for both content & access providers ... quote:
If your idea is so smart, why don't ANY providers actually do that?
They don't do that because of the way the Internet service community arose. In the early days it was difficult to do the accounting on a byte per byte basis and the ISPs would have actually made less money if they had charged by the byte.
In 1998 I was operating a dialup ISP with only 8 phone lines and I *DID* bill by the byte. I had 56 subscribers. I billed five dollars per month for access and so many cents per minute on line.
The highest monthly bill I ever send out was about 18 dollars. So the idea is smart and does work.
quote:
I mean, you would so like to see charging by the byte, but if I pay by the byte, then I only pay for bytes I specifically request. That means no pop-ups, no banners, no ads, no spam, no nothing.
Since your browser pulls those pop-ups, banners, ads and spam and since the ISP has no way of knowing which banners, ads, and spam you don't want, you do pay for those bytes. Otherwise someone would tell the ISP that he was censoring their data. Clearly nobody wants censorship. We are an ISP and we do not manage *ANY* content to our users. They get whatever they pull. They are responsible if their fifteen year old pulls kiddie porn, even if mom and dad don't want it. As far as that goes, if someone comes to us with a subpoena regarding content, we answer it as soon as possible and as completely as possible. So will you on that upstream 10 mb torrent if you share the wrong stuff. You may think otherwise but it is hard to stop the Marshall from carrying your server out the door while you are explaining to his buddy that the handcuffs are not necessary. 
quote:
I get only exactly what I want, because otherwise, the ISP is ripping me off. It's not MY fault I use over 1000GB/month.
Whose fault is it then? Of course it is your fault you use the bandwidth you use. If you provide a service and people use it, you are responsible for sending those bytes. You can turn off the service, can you not? If you use a service on the Internet, you are responsible for those bytes. You are not required to use that service, are you?
quote:
I am paying for a PIPE to the internet, and I can use it as I see fit.
We have a 10 MBit pipe to the Internet which is shared among our customers. If you were to pull 1000 GB/Month that would equate to approximately 30 percent of the total traffic that our connection to the Internet can support. Should you be charged thirty percent of our total cost for our fractional DS-3? Well if you were not, we would go out of business fairly quickly, would we not?
quote:
If they want to charge me more than 35.00 for a 10/10 connection, then they should. Oh, WAIT, I get my internet access from my town owned utility! I guess the taxpayers are subsidizing me! Haha!
It is good that you feel you are getting over on the taxpayers, at least that demonstrates that you have a grasp of the truth, even if your grasp of business realities is somewhat shakey. | |
| | bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
 ·Packet8
| Charging per byte does nothing to make the whole issue of net neutrality go away. Its a fantasy to think otherwise because charge per byte doesn't eliminate the competition in the two VoIPs that the Bells are freaking out about.
The statement that this has ANYTHING to do with the costs associated with people using their internet connections is a diversion from the real issue and you have fallen right for it. The real issue is that the Bells and the MSOs are unprepared to compete against the Google Videos and You Tubes because they would be working on the old school business model that won't work in the internet age.
--
Ann Coulter doesn't know jack about science...
"Extremes to the right and left of any political dispute are always wrong." —Dwight Eisenhower | |
| |
978y9iuj
@shawcable.net
| "just like Telus & Shaw does for their broadband connections as mentioned in this other BBR story"
Shaw does not charge for going over their cap. If you abuse it alot and often you will be warned, that is all.
As for telus, it sounds as if they do not as I hear from telus users that there cap is a soft cap. A telus user can give you a more accurate response for the telus stance. | |
| | 
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| said by LiamJunket :... charge by the byte after a certain monthly cap is exceeded, just like Telus & Shaw does for their broadband connections as mentioned in this other BBR story: » Telus 6Mbps Tier This approach doesn't give an incentive for an ISP to be neutral though. Consider this example:
Say you have Comcast HSI which has its own digital phone service. This service competes directly with every other VoIP provider out there. Even if Comcast was charging by the byte, they can still block or degrade the connections to other VoIP providers as a means of favoring their own phone service.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
| | 
tcharp
T C
Premium
join:2002-10-23
Lubbock, TX | I think you can still have large providers banning access to other providers content even if you charge by the bit. I think its more a matter of $$$.
-TC | |
| | | | |
|
|
Net Neutrality Fight in South Korea
Easy solution for both content & access providers ...