Though I applaud Google's developing Android as an open source platform
I DO NOT applaud their activities regarding the end to Net Neutrality.
I'm getting tired of this growing trend of what essentially is
"corporate communism" or where the corporations run everything including
the government. Let's leave the Internet as it is. Or if the telecoms
are crying because their expansion need to be paid for (after their
exec's new yachts, private jets and mansions, of course) and start
behaving arrogantly then it is time to take the Internet out of their
hands and put it in the commons. It is the "information highway" and
should be treated like our interstate highways with free and open access
to everyone.
Web site devoted to blocking this kind of activity:
http://www.savetheinternet.com/
Also make your local small business people aware of this. They often
just contract someone to do a web page and don't pay attention to this
stuff. Let them know their customers will have difficulty getting to
their web pages if net neutrality ends. Time to set fires under the
usual apathetic asses of Americans.
Shane Isbell wrote:
Some info on Google and Verizon on net neutrality in the link below.
The article is a bit muddled. What Verizon is really trying to do is QoS and
charging more for better service, something very similar to how they are now
charging for tethering (although in a new way which I explain below).
T-Mobile never built out their QoS so we can expect them to remain neutral;
but with Verizon and Google both coming out in support of this, I'd expect
two things to happen on VZW.
First, Android services are going to become tiered so to get the
full-experience is going to start costing end-users more.
Second, companies like Google are going to be able to strike deals so that
services like YouTube will be unrestricted, while services of competitors
(or other third-parties) who don't pay Verizon will be throttled.
I understand the reasons carriers give for this, they pay a lot for the
network so the people that use it the most should pay more. This is standard
business practice. But this new argument emerging that certain websites or
services should be restricted is rather smelly and reflects back the old
Verizon (the true Verizon?) prior to Android. It's basically saying that
companies that pay more will have better service and this allows whole
competitive landscapes to shift in ways that QoS on the end-user couldn't.
To make this more specific, say you have a really popular Android
application and then Verizon has a most-favored vendor that decides to come
up with a competitor to your application. Well, when your service becomes
twice as slow (or even unusable), which service do you think users will move
to? This is a very dangerous slope for Android.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-09/google-verizon-offer-joint-internet-policy-proposal-without-mobile-limits.html
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android
Discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en.
