Neither one, obviously, is ideal and I don't want any throttling of the
Internet at all. The question is who truly has jurisdiction over the
Internet? On one hand, the U.S. government and educational institutions
could lay claim to it since they were the founders, but it's grown to be
an international beast that hundreds of millions of people depend on.
Even if the U.S. passes some net-neutrality law (either abolishing
content based charges and/or charging users based on resources used, or
establishing true neutrality), there's no guarantee that the rest of the
world will follow suit or honor those same laws.
If we leave it to the ISPs to work out the issue, you can bet they're
going to decide in favor of something that increases their profits, as
opposed to serving the needs of their customers.
I'm not sure that there is a[n] [good] answer for the political and
policy issues the Internet at large is facing.
Raymond
On 8/11/2010 3:49 PM, Shane Isbell wrote:
It's two separate issues: (1) charging users based on their use of a
resource; (2) charging providers of a service for the ability to
deliver the service.
(1) is pretty standard in many industries and relates to your toll
booth analogy. (2) would be more like a state charging a company (say
Walmart) for the privilege for their customers to use a highway to
reach their store. The smaller stores and mom-and-pop joints can't or
won't pay so they go out of business.
(1) may limit growth for everyone but (2) becomes a means of creating
unfair competition.
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Raymond C. Rodgers
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
While I generally agree with you, I would like to point out that
there are toll booths on some of the national interstate highways
in some parts of the country. Take for example I-80 outside of
Chicago, IL, and also through much of Ohio, or I-44/40 in
Oklahoma... The interstates were long ago paid for by our taxes,
and their upkeep is paid by more tax money, and yet states are
allowed to profit from them apparently, though most don't have
toll roads.
That said, I whole heartedly agree that internet management needs
to be something outside the control of governments and businesses,
but I can't come up with a reasonable idea for a governing body
that would be able to enforce rules and provide equal access for
all at a reasonable cost as well...
Raymond
On 8/10/2010 2:30 PM, Brian Conrad wrote:
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]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:android-discuss%[email protected]>.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en.
--
Shane Isbell (Founder of ZappMarket)
http://apps.facebook.com/zappmarket/
--
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.
--
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.
