
Net Neutrality Rules Are Imminent From the F.C.C. - m3mb3r
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/21/business/media/21fcc.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
======
code_duck
Wireless is not fundamentally different than wired. What if considerations
like this were made for home internet service? If Qwest had allowed to block
Skype because they wanted people to keep using landlines at home?

The Skype blocking has to go. I have a Verizon phone and Skype is so
thoroughly neutered, it's absurd. They even ruin skype-to-skype calls by
forcing the app to use only 3G, not wifi, and routing the call through an 800
number to Skype. Calls within the US, even when dialed through Skype, are
actually carried by Verizon. On the other hand, my plan has unlimited data -
it's just plain stupid. Same with text messaging... a total scam at this
point.

So, by doing this they are preventing the next innovative applications. Better
not be planning on doing something that might cause AT&T to make less money,
folks!

~~~
bad_user
I'm more and more convinced that Net Neutrality will be very damaging to the
Internet.

    
    
         Wireless is not fundamentally different than wired.
    

That's irrelevant: wireless is still young with lots of competition going on.
You don't fix something that ain't broken.

And about your problems with Skype, you don't know lots of details, like: can
Verizon actually handle it? Or who's to blame, Verizon, Skype, the FCC?

    
    
         Same with text messaging... a total scam at this point
    

Yeah, it's called capitalism. What? Do you want regulation on that too?

~~~
code_duck
Based on my position, wired is still young with lots of competition going on.
You don't fix something that ain't broken.

Why should the two be considered differently?

And no, I feel consumers can figure out for themselves that paying .25 to send
256 bytes of data is a scam. But I don't think wireless carriers should be
granted special abilities to protect this sort of underhanded dealings which
wired providers are not. What would you think if it was said that DSL and
cable internet providers could block MSN, AIM, Jabber and Skype IMs because
they had a special deal where they wanted you to use their IM service for .25
cents a message? Though other data was unlimited? I'd have a problem with
that, personally.

------
aleem
Julius Genachowski wants to pimp bandwidth to the highest bidder. It's a scary
and slippery slope.

"We must take action to protect consumers against price hikes and closed
access to the Internet and our proposed framework is designed to do just that:
to guard against these risks while recognizing the legitimate needs and
interests of broadband providers," - Spin Maestro and FCC Chairman Julius
Genachowski.

Really? To protect us from what hikes? What closed Internet? Please drop dead.

If this goes through, Europe will soon follow and then the rest, whether they
like it or not. If they don't participate, they'll lose out because US will
prioritize all incoming global traffic anyway. Video streams from China-based
startups will load the slowest in the U.S.

Networking companies will rush to build large scale traffic prioritization
solutions and in the process strive to achieve maximum regulatory compliance
with local/federal laws so they can peddle their product better, faster.

ISPs will invest in the infrastructure for packet monitoring and filtering
because it will directly improve their bottom line. They only will drive up
the demand for "network neutrality" solutions. And once they have the
infrastructure and tool chain in place, we'll see a lot more censorship and
eavesdropping.

The consumers will be fooled into thinking that this will help their YouTube
videos load faster.

------
cbarnardo
If you think after the massive gift given to the healthcare industry in name
of reform and the even greater gift given to the big money banks in the name
of TARP that our government is motivated by anything other than the interests
of industry. I have a bridge I am selling in China. Its very big and makes
tons of money. Just let me know if you are interested.

------
goombastic
I hope they forbid the Indian version of "netjacking" where ISPs make some
sites free to access.

------
fleitz
“If corporations are allowed to prioritize content on the Internet, or they
are allowed to block applications you access on your iPhone, there is nothing
to prevent those same corporations from censoring political speech.” said Mr.
Franken

Oh great, so once these rules are passed companies like Paypal and Amazon
won't be allowed to censor political speech such as that by wikileaks? Somehow
I have a feeling these rules will cause the exact opposite. I'm much less
worried about corporations censoring political speech than I am the gov't.

