Net Neutrality

Net Neutrality Article

The FCC is going to vote on a new bill on this matter. What this bill does is that companies will be able to choose which sites we can or cannot access based on how much we pay. This new rule is a double edged sword. Companies cannot block services from rival companies (i.e. Verizon cannot block Skype).

But here is where it gets ugly. This rule will allow ISPs to charge internet users for high bandwidth sites or services. For example, my ISP can charge me more for using YouTube. We are now Net Neutral because I can send this message at the same speed I usually could.

My thoughts are yes, this will do companies good but I wouldn't want to pay more cash just to access certain sites. I can get fast access to sites I don't frequent but I have to pay just to send an email or watch a funny video on YouTube?

It is a step in the right direction. I'm not terribly surprised about the mobile carrier amendment to that bill though. Congress had to throw carriers a bone in order to get this bill approved.

To be honest, most cell phone users seem to put with a lot of crap their carriers dish out, so it isn't like anyone is going to complain about the potential repercussions of this decision.

I'd like to keep it Neutral, thank you very much.
I think ISP being able to charge more for high bandwith sites is a joke. Some of us are barely getting by paying the bills, and now we have to worry about whats site I was on b/c of the price? No thanks.

FCC sold out. That is all.

I would REALLY like to keep the net neutral. I mean, how many of us play online games? If the companies are allowed the freedom to charge more for sites with more bandwidth, it's only a matter of time before they'll be able to charge more for just using more bandwidth period. I mean, I know, right now we can pay for better, faster internet, but this would basically mean that all the people playing WoW, COD, or any game that pulls more bandwidth would cost money as you play it.

Also, what the companies would really love to do (I mean, I would, if I ran a big ISP) is turn the internet into a system much like television. You would have to pay for different packages for different sites, and it would be different for every ISP. So, say with one company, you could get to Fakku with the lowest package, in another company, you may very well have to pay 5, 10, 15 dollars more a month to get to Fakku, which would come bundled with tons of sites that you don't care about.

It is a slippery slope, and while it happened with Television, and things turned out alright, it would be really nice if the internet just stayed neutral.

FAKKU =/= HBO

i concur.

The FCC sold out? Since when? http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703581204576033513990668654.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories

[font=Verdana][color=green]This. It reminds me of the freakin' FCC song in Family Guy.

Anyway, it is a joke of a bill. It doesn't even effect me, but I'm disillusioned by it; it could easily be passed in my country too. It's a round-the-back-door way of trying to control what people view on the internet.

You should read the article I just posted man.

What's up with the politicians claiming that this is such a big step?
This article implies the bill sanctifies non-neutral practices. Looks like a giant buyout to me.

[font=Verdana][color=green]I apologise; I had the "Post a reply" page open for quite a while after I posted - I got distracted, so I didn't see your post. I will have a look at that now, and retract any statements I have made if necessary.

Been trying to tell my friends about this for ages... sadly it's just complicated enough to confuse/deter the average person enough to not bother following the issue.

The net needs to stay neutral or it will fall into a dark age. ;_;

This simply reeks of "Government-sponsored corporate money-grab." I'm not one to complain about the government often, but this is just ridiculous.

My neighbor and I get the same internet service from our ISP. Why should my family have to pay more because I watch online videos or play WoW or Xbox Live games (WoW and XBL both also being services I already pay for)?

I'm sorry, but in no other industry is it acceptable to charge more for the same service.

Wow, America... And here in the civilized world even mobile Internet providers are moving towards unlimited flatrates...

Your article says that the bill the OP's article was passed. So yes, they sold out.

GAME OVER, GIRL, GAME OVER. I just hope that my ISP doesn't pick this up...

The best salution is to hack that company secret then blackmail it's president..

easy and fun it also dangerous not for the weak AT heart and mind though.

Yeah, because that's totally the logical thing to do, and I'm sure you're just the man for the job! I bet breaking into a major business, and blackmailing it's CEO, is a cakewalk for a hacker* like you.

I think most of you guys are being overly idealistic. It was still a step in the right direction, or perhaps I should say necessary direction.

Everyone knew the sanctity of Net Neutrality wasn't going to go through without some compromises. Landline internet providers are not allowed to interfere, and that does represent the majority of internet users and the fear of cable providers trying to control the internet.

Then again, I'm not terribly sympathetic towards cell phone users because I don't like using the internet or other online applications on my phone. I don't really care what mobile providers are allowed or not allowed to do.