I understand that the ruling simply stated that the FCC has little or no right to regulate the internet, specifically not to require "net neutrality" allowing Comcast to limit certain activities. I believe that the ruling can result in selective practices perhaps censorship by the ISPs. Not a good thing, but perhaps someone has more detailed info.
best Paul -----Original Message----- From: Owen Densmore <[email protected]> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected]> Sent: Thu, Apr 8, 2010 11:30 am Subject: [FRIAM] Net Neutrality Ruling Has anyone made sense of the ruling in Comcast's favor? As I understand, they cut down bit-torrent due to bandwidth usage. But that makes no sense, it is not a real-time protocol. If they wanted to manage bandwidth, they would presumably go after Hulu, Amazon, Netflix etc. I'm not even sure how successful a bit-torrent block would be -- each person chooses their own port address. There is a default port but all are warned to change it for security reasons. And there are no bit-torrent servers, but lots of peers sharing. Any file you download are fragments from several peers. -- Owen ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
