FCC Net Neutrality Flap: Fast Lanes Don't Scare Me

About Us

Advertise

Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View

[close this box]

<< < Page 2 / 4 > >>

50%

stevew928,
User Rank: Ninja
5/20/2014 | 1:10:28 PM

Re: Postal Service

And you actually believe that? Can you spell naive? How about hoodwinked? Sheesh, learn some critical thinking skills dude.

I wonder why they are fighting so hard to keep the regulation in a state of allowing them to do so? Hmm... Oh, yea, I forgot, the poor ISPs are just struggling to survive, given the evil users that just use *so* much data they can't take it any longer. Their networks are going to break under the load, and they just have no money to improve them unless, maybe they could trick us all into given them a few hundred more billion in tax incentives? Yea, that might work. ;)

Reply | Post Message | Messages List | Start a Board

50%

stevew928,
User Rank: Ninja
5/20/2014 | 1:04:46 PM

Re: Postal Service

Netflix shouldn't have to pay *more* as they have already paid for their connection. And my ISP has already been well paid to deliver *whatever* data I pick, be it Netflix, a buddy's home video they are self-serving, or a zillion e-mails.

But, you do make a good point about trusting the FCC at all. However, at least with the ISPs classified as utilities, it becomes more obvious when the law is being broken... it isn't just this vague 'consumer's interest' stuff. But ultimately, no, so long as the FCC is in pay of lobbiests, we can't fully trust them. We'll need regulation on lobbying efforts to fix that, but that's a whole other broader problem.

And, we don't need more investment, we just need ISPs to actually invest in the infrastructure, rather than just pocketing obscene profits. For example, I pay my ISP over $80/mo and the amount of data I typically transfer (and I'm a fairly heavy user) costs them under $0.50, all costs included. They can take a bit of that $79.50 in profits and there should be plenty to re-invest.

Reply | Post Message | Messages List | Start a Board

50%

Brian.Dean,
User Rank: Ninja
5/20/2014 | 10:05:35 AM

Re: Postal Service

One scenario that comes to mind is that, the consumer should end up paying slightly lower for their 75MB connection and the differences would be picked by the video provider -- the video provider needs the consumer, not the other way around.

Reply | Post Message | Messages List | Start a Board

50%

Brian.Dean,
User Rank: Ninja
5/20/2014 | 9:44:39 AM

Re: Postal Service

@Thomas, that is an excellent thought provoking example. My take is that telecom giant X is subsidizing its own subsidiary (company Y) because the market has demonstrated that company Z can sustain a service by paying higher for the telecom's infrastructure. If this continues, then I would imagine that shareholders would want to liquidate the subsidiary or allocate a higher cost to it, so that profits can be written to the parents company's account.

Reply | Post Message | Messages List | Start a Board

100%

RobPreston,
User Rank: Author
5/20/2014 | 9:24:27 AM

Re: Postal Service

The content providers aren't the customers of the network operators unless they choose to be. No one is forcing the content providers to pay up. And not all the network operators even want to get into the paid prioritization business. The CEO of Comcast has said he's not interested, because, he says, setting up these arrangements would be too complicated.

Reply | Post Message | Messages List | Start a Board

100%

Brian.Dean,
User Rank: Ninja
5/20/2014 | 9:14:35 AM

Re: Postal Service

That's a very real factor that plays out in the real world, but it is because of economies of scale -- retailers get a lower price on products because they buy in quantity and if a customer begins to buy products in frequent intervals, then they too get discounts, an example that comes to mind is Amazon's premium accounts that offer discounts on shipping to frequent buyers.

Reply | Post Message | Messages List | Start a Board

50%

anon9675841497,
User Rank: Apprentice
5/20/2014 | 12:36:38 AM

Re: Postal Service

"That's a good point, but Netflix doesn't have to pay more -- it can stay with the standard baseline service."

That's a very strange way to look at it considering Netflix is (was) not buying service from Comcast, et all. I am paying (Verizon).

Please explain how me paying Verizon for 75 Mbps Internet service should require Netflix paying Verizon to deliver a 2 Mbps stream to me?

Reply | Post Message | Messages List | Start a Board

50%

Thomas Claburn,
User Rank: Author
5/19/2014 | 7:27:02 PM

Re: Postal Service

My worry about antitrust law is that it only considers consumer harm. If telecom giant X owns video company Y and then decides to charge competing video company Z twice as much as it charges its own subsidiary, that may not trigger antitrust intervention.

Reply | Post Message | Messages List | Start a Board

50%

datadoctor,
User Rank: Strategist
5/19/2014 | 3:44:40 PM

Re: Network 'Providers' are Unnecessary

The highway metphor would go something like this: You get on the highway and pay a toll - if you drive free you can drive 40mph, if you pay $10, you can drive 55mph, and if you pay $45 you can drive 95mph.

Reply | Post Message | Messages List | Start a Board

50%

JohnM818,
User Rank: Apprentice
5/19/2014 | 3:40:16 PM

Network 'Providers' are Unnecessary

The problem I have with the advocates of fast lanes is that the people advocating them have mainly one interest: To use something that they didn't build to extort money from those who did. The so called 'providers' have wedged their businesses between the end users and organizations to act like turnstiles to something they don't own. And they count on users to not question it. But why? Infrastructure could just as easily allow an open, first come, first serve traffic operation like that enjoyed by billions of users of roads and bridges. They get away with avoiding such an infrastructure because the users play along by (in the words of Neil Young) "singing songs for pimps with tailors who charge ten dollars at the door...for the turnstiles." ISPs are a useless commodity that the users don't need. They just have not yet realized that Net Neutrality isn't just possible, it's good...and it's the natural order of things.

Reply | Post Message | Messages List | Start a Board

<< < Page 2 / 4 > >>

Reports

The State of Cloud Computing - Fall 2020

Download this report to compare how cloud usage and spending patterns have changed in 2020, and how respondents think they'll evolve over the next two years.

Download Now!

More Reports