Will Net Neutrality Save the Internet?

[Dokkie]

Run time: 04:02 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTshrURtcjU   Posted on YouTube: December 20, 2010 By YouTube Member: ReasonTV Views on YouTube: 13800   Posted on DU: December 22, 2010 By DU Member: Dokkie Views on DU: 1011

 
Advocates say that "Net Neutrality" will "save the Internet."

But does the Internet need saving?

Net Neutrality is a proposed set of regulatory powers that would grant the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) the ability to control how Internet service providers (ISPs) package their services. Proponents argue that such rules are necessary to ensure that ISPs treat all data on the Internet equally and don't slow or even restrict access to various websites and other parts of the Internet.

However well-intentioned, the practical effect will be to limit consumer choice and grant the federal government unprecedented power over the Internet, all in the name of fixing a problem that doesn't exist in any meaningful way (http://reason.com/blog/2010/02/24/recen­tly-at-reasontv-net-neutr). Indeed, examples of the behavior that Net Neutrality will combat are few and far between.

I am one of those liberal who have stupidly gone on supporting net neutrality without ever understanding why we need it or how it works if a perfect bill is passed. I have always thought of myself as fair minded, inquisitive and reasonable person who is willing to look at all evidence before making up my mind. So now that some form of net neutrality has passes, I was wondering if someone can help me answer these questions

1. What is so wrong about the internet that we require a bill to fix it?
2. Now that the FCC has the authority to regulate it, what do u expect to happen the next time a George Bush gets back into office?

[ixion]

1. They're going to 'save' it by killing it

as is their usual S.O.P.

- When they want to 'liberate' someone, they blow them up.

- When they want to make someone 'safe' they throw them into a concentration camp.

- When they want to 'help' someone, they throw them in jail.

Such is the nature of modern government. :(

[Dokkie]

2. but why are so many well people buying into it?

TYT network, Rachel my top 2 most trusted news source supports this which really confuses me. All the while, my connection speed seems to be increasing and my monthly price decreasing. I am sure theres a simple, easy to understand reason why this well oiled machine needs to be tampered with and I am waiting someone to straighten me out cos i kinda fell left out here.

[Confusious]

8. The point is to keep it that way.

All the while, my connection speed seems to be increasing and my monthly price decreasing. I am sure theres a simple, easy to understand reason why this well oiled machine needs to be tampered with and I am waiting someone to straighten me out cos i kinda fell left out here.

Every machine needs maintenance. Just because it appears to be working doesn't mean it doesn't have fatigue of some sort.

[nebenaube]

3. This video is disinfo intended to confuse the issue...

The principal of net neutrality has always applied to the net.

[Dokkie]

4. applied by whom?

theres no law in the books right now that dictates what the ISP can or cannot do. If am wrong please please tell me which agency regulates it and what the rules are. Just don't accuse me of posting dis-info without giving me concrete proof of it.

Also I remember paying per minute with AOL internet connection when I 1st got internet and slowly as new ISPs got into the market, pay per use was phased out for the more efficient flat rate. This had nothing to do with net neutrality and yet the ISPs adopted it

[Confusious]

9. theres no law in the books right now that dictates what the ISP can or cannot do.

That's the problem. If one ISP decides they want to make everyone who does video streaming cough up more dough, they can do it.

They could make all websites cough up more dough or else face the null pit. They could give preference to republican websites over democratic ones, or charge places like this to stay on equal footing.

If you don't they they would, you're living in a fantasy land.

[pam4water]

5. That video was all double talk BS.

[Dokkie]

6. double talk, dis-info

Can explain where it goes wrong? Btw I am not saying the internet is perfect because its not, but the internet as it is works well enough for the vast majority of its users.

Another question to ask,
How many people will stay with their ISP if it blocked/slowed down DU or say youtube website?
Cos I know I will switch immediately to quest or time warner (2 of Cox smaller competitors) if cox communication tried such a move. This is my mind is net neutrality which is there for most people with 2-3+ ISP companies in their area.

[Confusious]

7. What if they all do it?

What choice do you have then? If one company starts, then soon they will all be doing it.

The point of net neutrality is to keep access for everyone, not just those who can pay the most.

[Dokkie]

10. AS I already said

if they slowed or blocked my access to any of my favorite website, I will drop my connection immediately and believe you me, they do not want that. I remember the 1st time I tried to cancel my internet connection, the fellow on the phone started trying to inquire the reason why I was canceling my service and I said because it the rates were too high, he then offered to give me the new customer deal which was only meant for new customers.

The truth is that these companies want as many customers as possible so they can continue to collect payment from as many people as possible. Charge too much for internet and they will lose their customers and which may in turn cause them lose all the money they invested on fiber optic wires. We as consumers need to realize that we have so much power to dictate to these companies how to operate

[Confusious]

11. It's not you they will be charging

It's google, it's NBC, if you have a website and can't cough up the money, then you get put on the back burner.

And of course, the sites they do slow down traffic to will be trade secrets, so you won't even be able to find out.

You're also kidding yourself when you think you have power over these companies as a consumer. As an individual, you have none. Get enough people together, you'll have just as much power as these corporations want to give you.

[Dokkie]

12. so now I should care about

multi national billion dollar companies like google, youtube and msnbc? those companies take up loads of bandwidth and should pay for it. I really dont understand what the problem is. Right now we have had so much grassroot movement and organisation originate from the internet, if they were going to censor anything, then they would have censored/slowed the Dean campaign website and supporter websites down when he ran for office but for some magical reason without any regulation, they didn't move a finger.

Also what happens when the republicans take back the whitehouse with their own FCC chairman? we will be hypocrites to stop them from tinkering with the internet, afterall we have been on record supporting FCC regulation of the internet, albeit a weak version of net neutrality

[Confusious]

15. No, but you should care about this site

What happens when they try to charge this place extra not to fuck with the packets? Do they pay up or go out of business?

Net neutrality just says they have to treat all packets the same. No matter where they are from.

As far as the Republicans, they proabably have the same idea you do about neutrality. The corporations should be able to do anything they want.

[Dokkie]

17. you are still missing the point

treating everybody the same means that a for profit, High definition streaming video porn website would be charged the same price democratic underground who i guess uses much much less bandwidth that the porn site. This would end up hurting the little person because he/she will end up subsidizing the cost for the big companies who can push out much more content that the up and coming website owner.

[Confusious]

20. No I'm not missing the point

I think your point is bull. The more likely scenario is that if you can't pony up the bucks to get preferred treatment, your site doesn't go anywhere.

For your info, bandwidth is sold in blocks, which used to be (I don't know if it still is) a T1 line. 1.544 Mbit/s up/down.

You have a HD porn site, you're going to paying for 10 or more, while DU only needs 1.

This is how it works right now.

What will happen if there is no net neutrality bill is that there will be an extra charge on top of that to make sure your packets don't get "lost."

[Dokkie]

23. slow down

Ok bandwidth determines the size of content that can be sent right? so now which factor determines this extra charge will be implemented withou net neutrality?

[Confusious]

24. Whatever the carrier decides they want it to be.

and I don't trust those companies.

I changed to use carrier, because it's not really the ISP that's going to be making those charges, it's the company that controls the long distance lines such as sprint, at&t, etc.

And yes, bandwidth determines how much data can be sent. Usually in bits per second on a network.

on Edit: Now that I think about it, the ISP could also charge. So every line the data packet passes through could wrack up a charge. How many bills is a company or small site owner going to get if someone from England, for example, accesses your site? One from the ISP, One from sprint, One from comcast, One from at&t? Those bills are going to add up fast.

Only the largest companies will be able to play in that game.

[BigEd7]

13. Very Misleading Video...

The Net Neutrality Rules have been in effect for almost a decade and this vote is simply a way of saying keep things neutral and open. Several times AT&T, COMCAST and VERIZON have tried to force the FCC into changing the informal rules to allow them to regulate or eliminate various forms of traffic and they have been shut down each time. The most public one of late was when COMCAST tried to stop all torrent traffic and was admonished by the FCC to halt the practice of blocking torrent traffic then they tried to claim they never blocked it in the first place.

The communications companies are probably the best liars on the planet at this point.

[Dokkie]

14. This cant be true

I always see people claim net neutrality has always been around but whenever i try to ask them to show me which agency enacted/enforces these rules, they never reply. Also we have companies breaking rules setup by regulating agencies, so how come these companies have refrained from breaking these "informal" rules? I think those informal rules would have hurt their pocket books and that why they almost never broke it in those 10yrs

[Confusious]

16. Obiviously, you don't know much about the internet

It's been around a lot longer then 10 years. It's only gotten so obvious in the last 10.

Also, it's only recently that they have had the ability to mess with the scheduling of the packets. Try looking up iptables.

[Dokkie]

18. I never claimed to be an expert on the internet

But am open minded and very willing to listen if only someone can explain to me in simple terms why we need this and also answer some of my question on why we need it after the system has been working for 10+ yrs without any formal regulation

[Confusious]

19. I just gave you that reason

I'll give it to you again: It's only recently that they have had the power to schedule packets.

[Dokkie]

21. you know net neutrality

activism has been around way before Obama's 2008 campaign? So if the power to schedule packets is just a recent event? what were the activist trying to achieve before this discovery of scheduling packages?

[Confusious]

22. Yes I do, since 2003

And it's been going on since then. It's only recently that's it's gotten national attention.

When you're 40, 7 years ago was recent.

and since the internet is also around 40, 7 years ago was recent.