FCC's latest 'Net Neutrality' proposal will reportedly allow pay-for-priority Internet traffic

By Jos ยท 8 replies
Apr 24, 2014
Post New Reply
  1. After the FCC's  Open Internet Order, which prohibited ISPs from blocking online content and required ISPs to be more transparent about their policies, got struck down by the DC Circuit Court in January 2014, chairman Tom Wheeler is reportedly ready...

    Read more
  2. MilwaukeeMike

    MilwaukeeMike TS Evangelist Posts: 2,890   +1,224

    I know I'm going to be in the extreme minority of this opinion... but I don't think this is all that bad an idea. Allowing companies to pay for extra fast service will make things like UHD possible, and as the WSJ article points out "The proposal would open the door to new products from companies such as Apple which has explored the idea of offering a video service that would rely on a dedicated portion of the broadband pipe. "

    The arguments against it are from the ACLU who says "Barriers to innovation will rise, the marketplace of ideas on the Internet will be constrained, and consumers will ultimately pay the price." But barriers to who? New startups? Any new startup with a good idea gets swallowed up by one of the bigger internet players already, and no startup would have access to the media content that would require a fast connection.

    The benefits seem concrete, the downsides are pretty hazy.
    davislane1 likes this.
  3. Dukenukemx

    Dukenukemx TS Member Posts: 71   +16

    The problem is how do you define too much bandwidth that a service would need their own paid for dedicated pipe? YouTube and Netflix are obvious, but at what point do we start paying for even 56k speeds?

    Making the internet faster should be a natural evolution of the infrastructure, not something you'd only do when payed for. I'd be happier if I could choose ISPs and let them fight over for my money. Rather then having them fight over Netflix or YouTube for their money.
    lmike6453, Littleczr and wiyosaya like this.
  4. MilwaukeeMike

    MilwaukeeMike TS Evangelist Posts: 2,890   +1,224

    I think making it faster is a natural evolution (look at Google Fiber), but it's a slow one. The US is huge, we're not going to be able to build new wires fast enough to keep up with demand. And then there's the problem the phone companies had years back. They built tons of infrastructure and then people started using cell phones.

    The more I read about this issue, the more complicated it becomes. There are lots of technical details that are very important but hard to understand. They always talk about the 'last mile' meaning the end of the line near your home. They talk about the middle men in the equation. Even the first line of the WSJ story was "Regulators are proposing new rules on Internet traffic that would allow broadband providers to charge companies a premium for access to their fastest lanes." That implies that there are slow lanes and fast lanes, not just one for everyone to share. The news mentions these things, but doesn't get into detail. I have a feeling you'd need a degree in telecommunications and in law to really understand this issue.
  5. I live in an East-European country: the economy and the government is as corrupt as it can get, average payment is below the frog's *ss, yet we have better ISP offers for less than the worldcrasher -leader economy of US. We never had to pay extra for anything. We only paid for the bandwidth, and they provide said bandwidth, no complains or whining.
    Best part is, even if they couldn't do so, they do not have the same ways and means to bend the state's law at their benefit, they just die out the way it is meant to be.
  6. "Making the internet faster should be a natural evolution of the infrastructure, not something you'd only do when payed for. I'd be happier if I could choose ISPs and let them fight over for my money. Rather then having them fight over Netflix or YouTube for their money."

    Damn right!
    Excellent logic to me
  7. wastedkill

    wastedkill TS Evangelist Posts: 1,423   +350

    Net neutrality is officially corrupt...Paying for priority is good but paying to get the cap taken off is beyond a joke its a scheme to force more money out of everyone....
  8. Holotus

    Holotus TS Enthusiast Posts: 68   +9

    The entire government has been infiltrated by corporations to do their bidding. The FCC is filled with former lobbyists who worked for the Internet Service Providers. Tom Wheeler LOBBIED for Comcast before he came into office. This is so ****ed up that I cringe at how corrupt the system is. They want to control the internet to gain power & money over you.
  9. tipstir

    tipstir TS Ambassador Posts: 2,475   +126

    Netflix and Comcast blockage deal to unblock throttle down speeds will cost me $1 to $2 more a month before the summer. But if they start raising the price be more like it was with Comcast and HBO cost $16 a month. No way will I pay that for Netflix. I have OTA and ThisTV 24/7 movies for free.

    There should be no hold on the internet speeds let us have the fastest but don't charge over $100 a month for it. Netflix got to much money now from me an others they should be dropping prices but all no lets see how much more we can get from our customers so they can pay for the extra charges we have to pay out to Comcast to stop the throttling.

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...