Update on net neutrality.

Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:21 pm

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/20/f-c-c-poised-to-pass-net-neutrality-order/?partner=rss&emc=rss&src=igw

Not sure exactly what this means, because it sounds both good and bad, I figured it warranted at least minimal discussion though.

Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 6:13 pm

I was read something about this the other day has some good points but has its bad ones.On how isps can prioritise web traffic allot of them have been doing this anyway with torrents and other things for along time.But to block websites this could mean youtube and other such sites dont think google will be to happy.I pay for the premium package with my isp so I hope this does not happen to me..

Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 6:28 pm

you just got BLOCKED!

Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 6:36 pm

No just reached the end had to start again I was lucky.

Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 6:38 pm

reads more like a pontious pilot ploy once again.....
I am off to wash my hands.

Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 6:42 pm

This is article I read on it U.K
http://nds.coi.gov.uk/content/Detail.aspx?ReleaseID=416583&NewsAreaID=2&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+bis-news+%28BIS+News%29

Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 7:08 pm

Quote:

Openness – consumers should be able to access any legal content or service. Content providers should be able to innovate and reach users.

one word LEGAL gives way too much power to any institute to carte blanche block P2P.The fact that P2P is often being used for legitimate reasons means that to enable this they would either
a. have to have access to P2P services that are restricted or
b. implement a form of spyware to ensure it is not content that is copyrighted.
Its a whole can of worms whichever way i look at it.
One possibiltiy is registered trackers for games updates and opensource that is freely distributed by P2P systems that could be shut down/blocked if people upload other materials or a paid service (which is what i think they are moving towards)

Quote:

Transparency – providers should set out in detail the extent of their traffic management and the impact on customers.

I was under the impression that isp's did this but use the term legal/illegal to essentially tune bandwidth to their own advantages?

Quote:

Support for innovation and investment – ISPs should be able to manage their networks to ensure a good service and have flexibility in business models. Competition is important for ensuring continued openness and choice.

Again i see nothing here that is relevent. Access to the nets is the model and everything else is nothing but control and measures to limit what people can access.