InTheOfficeShorts: Net Neutrality

The following discussion contains quites taken directly from www.savetheinternet.com. I take no credit in the argument used to propose Net neutrality. Nor would I ever.

Category:

Film & Animation

Tags:

• xtranormal

[YesIAmDwight]

I'm going to step back for a second because you're now getting deep into the debate of how businesses should be run. I have to ask: Have you ever owned or operated a business in an administrative position or greater? If so, how many employees did your business manage and what was the economic impact of your business in your community?

[YesIAmDwight]

Actually, you know what? It doesn't matter. This entire discussion is based on the principle that you have neither the guts, desire or ability to operate or maintain the equipment and systems necessary to keep the internet functioning for the entire world, yet you feel like you have some form of moral superiority to lecture those who are doing just that on how to do it. The world doesn't need more unqualified delegators. When you build your own self-sufficient ISP, then come back and talk.

[tacobandit]

It's not about trying to get crap for free. It's about resisting a redefinition of the internet. The internet is a network of computers. You pay for bandwidth. Then, you connect to anybody else at that bandwidth provided they too have purchased an appropriate amount of bandwidth. That's the model. That's how the internet grew to what it is today. Plain and simple. What we don't want is monopoly ISP's trying to cram that model into a cable tv model as it's in their interest to do so.

[YesIAmDwight]

@tacobandit "In their interest to do so" yet they aren't doing it and show no signs of doing it. You're not defining anything I'm not arguing. The issue on the table is that the providers want to charge websites like Netflix - a site that consumes 1/5 of the world's internet traffic - more money for the extensive bandwidth used. There is no "slow lane." There's "energy hogs." And those hogs pay more. Their service is "better" if they weren't consuming all of it.

[tacobandit]

As long as communications require public resources, the govt is going to have a say in how that can be fairly used in appropriate ways. And with any luck they'll do it in the interests of freedom: i.e. net neutrality. The internet communications model has been one of the greatest successes of freedom in modern times. To allow that to be subverted by corporatism would be a tragedy.

[tacobandit]

@YesIAmDwight Is this directed to me? Your answers: yes, ~20, revenues in 7 figs. The problem is that you think the net neutrality is solely a big govt or liberal thing.. that's a fundamental misunderstanding of the issue. I'm all for small govt. I love capitalism and freedom. The very principle of net neutrality is the principle of freedom. Your misunderstanding is that freedom can be subverted not just by govt but also by monopoly corporatism. As long as communications require public...

[SilentBat]

Too much time.

[tacobandit]

@YesIAmDwight They are showing signs of doing it via their efforts to astroturf the net neutrality efforts. If netflix is taking up all the traffic it's because it's what their customers choose to use their bandwidth for. That's the model of the internet. A redefinition of the internet would be one where comcast can control the traffic based on arbitrary rules (not legitimate concerns like QoS, etc) and when the internet starts cannibalizing comcasts cable revenues, you bet it's in their interes