21–30 of 223 posts
Make no mistake, regulations like this can lead to bubble bursts. This could very well be a first step toward the end of the current technology boom. Silicon Valley should be nothing but up in arms. Or, SV should be working on technological ways to circumvent throttles based on content.
"this decision leads to an internet that benefits Internet Service Providers" I would correct this to: "this decision leads to an American internet that benefits Internet Service Providers" The FCC can really only screw up the Internet for Americans. If you're an Internet user not in North America there's very little reason for you to care about the decision the FCC made today.
American decisions can set precedents which other countries follow, and are often pushed by their trade policies. They also affect American IT companies, which are used by people all over the world. There's good reason for non-Americans to care about the American Internet.
I don't think there's any reason for us non-US-Americans to care at all about the US internet. Just like we don't care about pretty much anything else that's happening in the US.
I want to say this first: I love net neutrality and I support it 100%. That said, I think this battle will go on forever until either - We have a decentralized network anybody can plug into without ISPs (mesh net) or - Cities build their own fiber infrastructure (or 4G towers for rural areas) and rent it out to companies. Cable/DSL become a thing of the past, and you connect via radio/public wifi/direct fiber. This b…
Don't forget about the SpaceX satellite grid going up.
"this decision leads to an internet that benefits Internet Service Providers" I would correct this to: "this decision leads to an American internet that benefits Internet Service Providers" The FCC can really only screw up the Internet for Americans. If you're an Internet user not in North America there's very little reason for you to care about the decision the FCC made today.
From the post:
"The result: ISPs would be able to once again prioritize, block and throttle with impunity. This means fewer opportunities for startups and entrepreneurs, and a chilling effect on innovation, free expression and choice online"
Do you not believe that the global internet has benefitted from North American tech companies that were able to innovate in part because they did't have to contend with gatekeepers and paid prioritization of traffic? Would Youtube have been possible under such a regime? Don't people from all over the globe consume Youtube content?
Additionally Ajat Pai is an ex Verizon lawyer. Verizon being half of the broadband duopoly in the US. Most countries have some similar former PTT(post telephone telgraph) monopoly/duopoly. This action sets a precedent for any other countries where the monopoly/duopoly is seeking to enact a similar gatekeeper/pay to play regime where there now stands an open internet.
I want to say this first: I love net neutrality and I support it 100%. That said, I think this battle will go on forever until either - We have a decentralized network anybody can plug into without ISPs (mesh net) or - Cities build their own fiber infrastructure (or 4G towers for rural areas) and rent it out to companies. Cable/DSL become a thing of the past, and you connect via radio/public wifi/direct fiber. This b…
My Stockholm apartment had multiple ISPs competing for service over fiber laid down by a state-owned company. In 2007 this meant symmetric 100mbit for about $30/month.
Let's all agree that your opinion is the correct one and go from there? That's a bold rhetorical maneuver, do you find that it ever works?
I've yet to see a viable, informed argument against NN given our current market/options.
If there is an alternative that's realistic to implement I would be very interested but I haven't heard one.
Make no mistake, regulations like this can lead to bubble bursts. This could very well be a first step toward the end of the current technology boom. Silicon Valley should be nothing but up in arms. Or, SV should be working on technological ways to circumvent throttles based on content.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My Stockholm apartment had multiple ISPs competing for service over fiber laid down by a state-owned company. In 2007 this meant symmetric 100mbit for about $30/month.
I live in the country and have this right now. 100mb for $50 or 1000mb for $100.
Make no mistake, regulations like this can lead to bubble bursts. This could very well be a first step toward the end of the current technology boom. Silicon Valley should be nothing but up in arms. Or, SV should be working on technological ways to circumvent throttles based on content.
Getting rid of 35-50 megabyte "text" pages would be a good start.