View Single Post
Old 09-23-2009, 12:01 AM   #25 (permalink)
dippin
Crazy, indeed
 
Location: the ether
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerclown View Post
Question: How could the ISPs and hardware companies legally prohibit access to a site such as this one, and is that even whats at stake here because I was under the impression it was more a matter of controlling the amount of bandwidth available to end-users. If it is the latter, and the stated explanation for it is to finance the physical expansion of the infrastructure of the internet for future innovation and new technologies, then whats the problem with that?
Net neutrality is not about the amount of total bandwidth the end user has access to.

It is about treating all packets of information sent and received by users the same way. That is, packets from all applications and all websites have to be treated similarly.

So it is not about the total bandwidth available, but the bandwidth available for different sites and applications. Without net neutrality, an ISP could make a deal with yahoo that it's pages would load much faster than google pages for example. Or it could completely block the transmission of VoIP packets, essentially killing voice communication over the internet. It could make certain sites or email addresses unreachable, if it so chose. In short, without net neutrality, ISPs can speed up or completely block programs and websites as they see fit. Think of what China does to its ISPs.

While it all may sound like some conspiracy theory, in many nations where net neutrality is not enforced ISPs have simply shut down VoIP to prevent competition, for example.

So on one hand you have the majority of content and software providers for net neutrality (google, microsoft, yahoo, ebay) and the majority of ISPs against it (At&t and verizon).


The issue you are talking about, of bandwidth, is another issue that some people want to tackle, but as the FCC chief said,
Quote:
Throughout, Genachowski stressed his own background in business and his concern for innovation. He decried "detailed rules" that would be immediately outdated and made clear that ISPs could still throttle heavy users at peak times and take reasonable measures to manage their networks.
I.e., limiting the amount of bandwidth little Johnny has as he tries to download 10 porn movies at the same time would still be ok, but not blocking VoIP, access to certain sites, etc.
dippin is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360