51–60 of 452 posts
I wasn't impressed with this article; it reads like fear mongering. More importantly, I don't think the fix is regulation, I think it's better privacy tech + increased competition via elimination of local monopolies. Do we really want to depend on government to enforce privacy on the Internet?
I wasn't impressed with this article; it reads like fear mongering. More importantly, I don't think the fix is regulation, I think it's better privacy tech + increased competition via elimination of local monopolies. Do we really want to depend on government to enforce privacy on the Internet?
If we dont depend on government for regulation we lose everything because no other system can arise within the confines of what we have.
Eliminating regulation will in no way eliminate local monopolies, only the opposite.
Does anyone else find the internet market odd? Up until now net neutrality and other policies have given us the following: 1. Massive monopolies which essentially control 95% of all tech (google, facebook, amazon, microsoft, apple, etc) 2. An internet where every consumer assumes everything should be free. 3. An internet where there's only enough room for a handfull of players in each market globally i.e. if you have…
The internet is the greatest barrier-lowering device to starting a business ever conceived. You can, using just your skills and barely any money, compete with google and facebook this afternoon ! (google and amazon will even give you a month to try for free) Your chances at winning are pretty low, but eventually someone will do it.
Please stop spreading this misleading idea.
I wasn't impressed with this article; it reads like fear mongering. More importantly, I don't think the fix is regulation, I think it's better privacy tech + increased competition via elimination of local monopolies. Do we really want to depend on government to enforce privacy on the Internet?
Does anyone else find the internet market odd? Up until now net neutrality and other policies have given us the following: 1. Massive monopolies which essentially control 95% of all tech (google, facebook, amazon, microsoft, apple, etc) 2. An internet where every consumer assumes everything should be free. 3. An internet where there's only enough room for a handfull of players in each market globally i.e. if you have…
I wasn't impressed with this article; it reads like fear mongering. More importantly, I don't think the fix is regulation, I think it's better privacy tech + increased competition via elimination of local monopolies. Do we really want to depend on government to enforce privacy on the Internet?
What alternatives to government regulation do you see in regards to data selling and paid preferential QoS? Other than "voting with your wallet" (which is largely impossible since most markets only have 1-2 ISPs) what can the average consumer do to prevent this? How will they even gain visibility? Do you know what information your ISP has sold about you over the last few years? It's definitely more than you think.
Net Neutrality is a meme started by Google (the Halliburton of advertising) as propaganda intended to help harm its competitors. Why shouldn't a local ISP make a deal with Bing Video to stream 5K unlimited in exchange for interruption ads, while limiting youtube traffic to 1080p? Why should Google strong-arm those ISPs (via net neutrality) into providing support for the most expensive leg of data transit between cust…
I stopped reading after your analogy to a highway. In a highway, slow users affect everyone and cause congestion. In a data pipeline, that is not the case. Most real world analogies for the internet are contrived and do more harm than good. We need to understand this technology is unlike anything we have had before, and its closest cousin is communications. And we have already qualified our communications pipelines a…
You misunderstand my point or you misunderstand QoS.
The capacity of a data pipeline can be significantly increased by QoS. Not its absolute, theoretical maximum, but its ability to achieve high throughput amid disparate traffic types. Ultimately it's all buffers and queues.
> And we have already qualified our communications pipelines as neutral infrastructure
Right, but POTS has a latency requirement. If you keep reading my comment, my point is simply that without making a claim for what the QoS rules should be, advocates of net neutrality are just handwaving and spreading FUD.
Does anyone else find the internet market odd? Up until now net neutrality and other policies have given us the following: 1. Massive monopolies which essentially control 95% of all tech (google, facebook, amazon, microsoft, apple, etc) 2. An internet where every consumer assumes everything should be free. 3. An internet where there's only enough room for a handfull of players in each market globally i.e. if you have…
1) happens naturally in most markets. Without net-neutrality I believe that it would be harder for these companies to be dethroned if something better came along. 2) I think will only continue to be true for a short period of time. With products like Netflix and amazon, and with traditional television channels like HBO and ESPN starting to charge for streaming online, I think consumer attitude will shift as they real…
In what way would it be harder for them to be dethroned exactly?
I wasn't impressed with this article; it reads like fear mongering. More importantly, I don't think the fix is regulation, I think it's better privacy tech + increased competition via elimination of local monopolies. Do we really want to depend on government to enforce privacy on the Internet?
That's like suggesting that we don't need laws against fraud in functional healthy markets. Removing monopolies would not fix the privacy issue either.
However, it would probably eliminate the need for net neutrality. In the meantime, we need it.
And we need to keep privacy laws in place until such time that technology makes it impossible for ISPs to discover any details about what you are doing. Don't hold your breath.
Does anyone else find the internet market odd? Up until now net neutrality and other policies have given us the following: 1. Massive monopolies which essentially control 95% of all tech (google, facebook, amazon, microsoft, apple, etc) 2. An internet where every consumer assumes everything should be free. 3. An internet where there's only enough room for a handfull of players in each market globally i.e. if you have…
The internet is the greatest barrier-lowering device to starting a business ever conceived. You can, using just your skills and barely any money, compete with google and facebook this afternoon ! (google and amazon will even give you a month to try for free) Your chances at winning are pretty low, but eventually someone will do it.
That's a 'lottery', not a 'barrier-lowering device'.