Doug Stewart on 6 Dec 2010 13:16:55 -0800

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [PLUG] Net Neutrality

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Art Alexion <> wrote:
> On Monday, December 06, 2010 03:28:59 pm Doug Stewart wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Art Alexion <> wrote:
>> > Addressing your last point first, are you saying that a consumer who, say
>> > wants access to AND their kid's Little League team's web site
>> > out to have to subscribe to multiple technologies?
>> No idea what you're talking about here. That's not part of the equation.
> From my understanding of the issue, it is precisely the equation.  The big
> ISP's want to charge content providers for better throughput, so if the bigs
> sites can afford it [as you put it below], all that Flash and Web 2.0 stuff on
> ESPN would be delivered to customers faster than the basic HTML 4 on the mom
> and pop web site.

The individual content providers have been bit players in this game
thus far. The big money/traffic is in peering agreements (see recent
Level 3/Comcast dust-up). I remain puzzled, though, at NetNeut
proponents' odd equating of "slower access == NO ACCESS". Please tell
me why a Netflix (or similar) shouldn't have to pony up more dough in
order to use a greater percentage of a backbone carrier's bandwidth?
And, ultimately, unless they pass that on to you, Mr. Streaming
Netflix Customer, what difference does it make to you?

> Again, we are talking about a new revenue stream which elevates content based
> on payments made to the ISP by content providers.

Do you think wide swathes of the Internet will all of a sudden be
unavailable to you because of your choice of ISP? Or will it merely be
that sites will be given a lower spot in the QoS queue?

And what business is it of yours, ultimately? Do we suddenly have a
Natural Right to make content available on an equivalent level? Do
Blogger users have a case against Google for not providing them the
"right" to install plugins, like WordPress users have? Do I, as a
DreamHost shared hosting customer, have the "right" to expect uptime,
system access, bandwidth and support equivalent to those who elect to
spend more of their hard-earned dollars on a VPS box? Or do companies
have some ability, nay, right to conduct their business in a manner
that makes fiscal sense, relatively free from government interference?

Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --
Announcements -
General Discussion  --