Net Neutrality: Your Opinions

farley91

CAGiversary!
Feedback
3 (100%)
Recently I have been thinking a lot about Net Neutrality because I happened to come across this site www.savetheinternet.com.

For those who do not know what Net Neutrality is, here is what it means:


Network Neutrality -- or "Net Neutrality" for short -- is the guiding principle that preserves the free and open Internet.
Put simply, Net Neutrality means no discrimination. Net Neutrality prevents Internet providers from speeding up or slowing down Web content based on its source, ownership or destination.
Net Neutrality is the reason why the Internet has driven economic innovation, democratic participation, and free speech online. It protects the consumer's right to use any equipment, content, application or service on a non-discriminatory basis without interference from the network provider. With Net Neutrality, the network's only job is to move data -- not choose which data to privilege with higher quality service.



What are your opinions on this issue?




Do you think that it is right for ISP's, telephone, or cable companies do discriminate against anyone for what they do on the internet?



Since we are paying for their service we should be allowed access to any equipment, content, application, or service on the internet without the companies slowing down our connection based on what sites or whatever we decide to go to.




They want to tax content providers to guarantee speedy delivery of their data. They want to discriminate in favor of their own search engines, Internet phone services, and streaming video -- while slowing down or blocking their competitors.
These companies have a new vision for the Internet. Instead of an even playing field, they want to reserve express lanes for their own content and services -- or those from big corporations that can afford the steep tolls -- and leave the rest of us on a winding dirt road.
The big phone and cable companies are spending hundreds of millions of dollars lobbying Congress and the Federal Communications Commission to gut Net Neutrality, putting the future of the Internet at risk.



It's just another way for them to make more money that they do not need. If we pay them for internet service then we are paying them our hard earned money to do whatever we want to do on the internet. The internet is really our last place anywhere to have the right of free speech. I know that free speech was always a right we had, but if you say something out in public people get offended and whatnot. The ISP's should not be able to dictate what content loads faster or slower or not at all based simply on its content. That's like saying what we are viewing is wrong, and they shouldn't be able to do that. We pay money to view what we want. The internet is supposed to be a place for everyone to access whatever they want and when they want.



So what are your opinions on net neutrality? I'm really interested to see what CAG's think about it. Let's start the discussion.
 
I'm all for the ability to do what you want online without fear of your ISP throttling or getting in the way. I don't think a provider should slow down or delay torrents, for example. The same for whatever equipment/software you want to us (although I don't expect the ISP to fully support customer purchased hardware, online services, software, etc.).

However, I also don't want my neighbor to be hogging 90% of the available bandwidth in our area while downloading torrents or whatever his activities may be, leaving everyone else to fight for whatever leftover scraps are available. As a paying customer I expect a fair share of what is available just like everyone else. If someone is being excessively greedy with his connection and it's taking away from others I don't have anything against the ISP cutting back that particular connection.

Unfortunately you can't really have both worlds. If an ISP cuts back on certain connections they're damned to hell because they are monitoring and policing their own network. If they don't monitor and throttle their network then they're damned to hell because a good chunk (I read somewhere that about 90% of internet bandwidth is taken up by 5-10% of all users) of their customers are missing out on the full service they pay for. If they incorporate some sort of bandwidth/download limit (say, 200gb a month) they're damned because they don't offer unlimited access. They're kinda stuck no matter what they do.

It's a bit of a slippery slope no matter how you approach it.
 
[quote name='captainfrizo']I'm all for the ability to do what you want online without fear of your ISP throttling or getting in the way. I don't think a provider should slow down or delay torrents, for example. The same for whatever equipment/software you want to us (although I don't expect the ISP to fully support customer purchased hardware, online services, software, etc.).

However, I also don't want my neighbor to be hogging 90% of the available bandwidth in our area while downloading torrents or whatever his activities may be, leaving everyone else to fight for whatever leftover scraps are available. As a paying customer I expect a fair share of what is available just like everyone else. If someone is being excessively greedy with his connection and it's taking away from others I don't have anything against the ISP cutting back that particular connection.

Unfortunately you can't really have both worlds. If an ISP cuts back on certain connections they're damned to hell because they are monitoring and policing their own network. If they don't monitor and throttle their network then they're damned to hell because a good chunk (I read somewhere that about 90% of internet bandwidth is taken up by 5-10% of all users) of their customers are missing out on the full service they pay for. If they incorporate some sort of bandwidth/download limit (say, 200gb a month) they're damned because they don't offer unlimited access. They're kinda stuck no matter what they do.

It's a bit of a slippery slope no matter how you approach it.[/quote]

I'm not talking about user purchased equipment. I mean all the equipment that is provided to you by your ISP or via the internet with plugins and stuff like that.

About your neighbor hogging 90% of the bandwith, I don't think that would ever happen. If a single individual/household is hoarding huge amounts of bandwith the ISP would probably just shut them down. Net Neutrality needs to continue that way when people visit websites it's not slowed down/doesn't load thanks to the ISP. Basically it's whatever the ISP wants you to see/doesn't want you to see is what you will get. It's simply isn't fair to the people who are paying monthly fees for internet service for sites to not load properly or slowly.

The internet is really the last place for someone to have completely free speech. Also what you do on your computer/internet should be your business and not the ISP.

It may be a slippery slope in some cases, but the internet should be a place of no discrimination and complete freedom. I mean they shouldn't have the right to take away certain content because they want to. For some people the internet is their only connection to the outside world, and taking away some content from them is disconnecting them further from the outside world.
 
Anyone who discusses politics with me knows I'm a libertarian. Thus, I am against regulation. That being said, if net neutrality is destroyed, then the internet will become regulated. So I am for net neutrality. I would say more about this, but it is late.
 
They really need to control the download of my neighbors. They are all watching videos and its clogging the pipes. Sometimes I get sent an email from my brother and it takes days for it to arrive.
 
bread's done
Back
Top