SkyHog said:
I hate the phrase net neutrality almost as much as I hated "Information Superhighway" or "A Network of Networks," but here it is. Oh yeah, the point:
Comcast has made it very obvious that they oppose Net Neutrality. They have joined with the NCTA (big surprise there) and there is now a commercial out to educate all the 'idiots' out there that don't know what Net Neutrality is.
The point of the commercial? Don't learn about it, take our word, you're too stupid to understand net neutrality anyways. I am embarrassed to work for a company that would stoop so low. (And I haven't yet made up my mind about net neutrality).
http://www.ncta.com/ContentView.aspx?ContentID=3526
Y'know, I don't get the whole "Net Neutrality Means YOU Pay" line. Are they trying to say that without net neutrality, I'll pay less for the same level of service? That they're going to dismiss potential profits and use income from companies like Google to subsidize my internet access? Isn't that against the rules of capitalism?
Furthermore, take any website, and do a traceroute on it. PoA, from my location, passes through ATT lines before connecting to Northland Cable's network. Does this mean that PoA would have to pay ATT AND NCTV just so their packets wouldn't be "deprioritized"? Just think about the number of networks every website you visit has to pass through to get to each of their viewers. Websites already pay ISPs for the right to be online, just like consumers do. This whole mess is just another way for the telecomms to extort money from companies and stifle any kind of competition on the internet. Not to mention what this could do to internet gaming. Oy.
The sad thing is the telecomms have said the following:
- We promise that we'll keep net neutrality, so you don't need to include it in legislation. -- Translation: As soon as we have the go ahead, net neutrality goes byebye.
- Without net neutrality, the consumer wins! -- Translation: Without net neutrality, WE win!
- Look at the big multi-billion dollar companies (But not us...we're just lowly telecomms, we barely get by) why don't we redistribute their wealth to make your internet experience "better"? -- Translation: We're not going to spend any of the money we get from our userbase to pay for infrastructure upgrades when we can just get more money from the companies and small businesses online and make a higher profit.
In the end, network neutrality is an integral part for an internet that is free from censorship and monopolies. Think of the number of small businesses that exist solely on the web. If net neutrality falls through, nothing bad is going to happen to Google, or Yahoo, or any other major website. They've got the money to pay the extortion fees. How many small businesses though will end up having to close up shop because the fees exceed their income? Sure, they could just not pay, but with "absolute power" over their networks, the telecomms could just lock the small business out.
Personally I think the telecomms are upset that other people are stepping into their realms. The phone companies are ****ed off about cell phone use and VoIP services like Vonage. The cable companies are ****ed off about the massive amount of video available online that most individuals don't even need to own cable TV in order to see their favorite shows. In reality though, this hardly affects their customer base. And in the end, the customer still needs an internet connection. But don't dare try to tell me that it's somehow Google's fault that I'm "having to pay" 60$ a month for my 3Mbps cable connection. And REALLY don't try to shove anything in front of me that makes the wild claim that without net neutrality, my monthly fees will drastically drop.
