Net Neutrality Rules Now In Place

[cordex]

Should an ISP be able to throttle any traffic that it wants to, such as the bits going to and from the INGO site, for example?

Depends on what the ISP and their customers agree to, doesn't it?

 

[IndySSD]

I am all for letting the market decide, but that can't happen when there is no market.

A lot of people purchase their broadband from a government sanctioned monopoly, and they need some sort of protection since competition is not allowed.

Without some sort of regulation, couldn't Comcast could just stop allowing its customers to watch Netflix by throttling it to a trickle? If you live where Comcast is the only choice for service what can you do?

I am all for free markets, and that is the ideal solution, but since we don't have that I am not totally against rules for the monopolies that do not have to worry about competing.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

There is. There is the kind the government charges with anti-trust violations, and then there is the kind that the government creates and protects -like cable/ISP companies.

You show me one Cable system that doesn't have satellite as a competitor.

The above highlight is exactly one of the reasons of the new FCC rules, Comcast is guilty as sin for doing this along with others.

No, Comcast in Indiana is not throttling any network traffic except for users who exceed the 250GB / month limit that is clearly stated in the EULA. Even then you get a written letter before they actually throttle or cut you off.

Comcast.net Terms Of Service - Announcement Regarding An Amendment to Our Acceptable Use Policy

About 2 weeks after I started streaming NetFlix (was getting HD content with no problem) all of a sudden I started seeing my connection to NetFlix servers tank while everything else was cruising along fine. Yep, they throttled my NetFlix connection in hopes me me dropping it and hitting up their POD/MOD options. Well they don't have to worry about me streaming that anymore because of NetFlix effectively slitting their throat for the DVD/Stream split.

Coincidental occurrences. Comcast in Indiana does not throttle specific types of network traffic anymore. They had to shut down their sandvines over a year ago. I believe there is currently an active lawsuit on this subject but I can't find it right now.

A friend of mine is a network engineer in charge of HSI capacity for Comcast and I'm telling you right now they wish they could throttle customers because they're dropping millions of dollars and thousands of man hours into additional CMTS hardware and licensing to accomodate the flood of bandwidth utilization that the FCC (forcing them to turn down their sandvines that monitored and throttled torrents) and Comcast Marketing (recent speed cap increases) have recently introduced to the network.

Really? I can choose between five or six wireless data providers, cable, and DSL. Other folks have the option for fiber to their home or to their neighborhood. Satellite internet is available in most places where other options are limited. Edit: Oh yeah, some power companies offer broadband through their power transmission lines. Sure, some of them have their own limitations - cost, bandwidth, monthly data transfer limits, whatever. The point is, there are alternatives out there.

People like cable because it's (usually) fast and cheap. It's cheap because they oversell available bandwidth. It's usually fast, which is good enough for most folks. As an ISP, one of the ways they can decrease cost and increase revenue (which means keeping broadband cheap for the average user, mind you) is to throttle people who hammer the network or use resource-intensive products that compete for services they offer at an additional charge.

Morally speaking, if an ISP wants to give people a discount on internet service with the condition that any streaming movies have to come from their pay service ... what is wrong with that?

If you don't like that and you want guaranteed speed without throttling, most providers have business-class plans with just that sort of guarantee and Service Level Agreements. No government intervention necessary.

Government "magic bullets" never work out the way people hope.

The only valid argument I've heard for net neutrality is that the packet inspection requirements automatically interfere with the "common carrier" exemptions that telecom companies have when it comes to illegal content.

^^ Pretty much this ^^

Even if there's only one provider, as long as it is within the bounds of a private contract between customer and provider, I see nothing wrong with it.

I don't like it, but it isn't fair to compare it to heating costs. My internet connection (while pretty beefy since I get fiber where I'm at) is completely expendable, given the right conditions. The wife and I have sat down and documented in what order and severity all luxuries will be removed if finances dictate such a move.

You don't have to have an ipad -- you don't have to have internet, netflix, or anything else. There may be a "convenience" monopoly, but since when is that illegal?

Yep....

Should an ISP be able to throttle any traffic that it wants to, such as the bits going to and from the INGO site, for example?

If you think not, then you support net neutrality.

I support net neutrality but government mandated and monitored net neutrality smacks of China's "Great Firewall".

 

[steveh_131]

You show me one Cable system that doesn't have satellite as a competitor.

Satellite is not a viable competitor when it comes to high speed internet access.

No, Comcast in Indiana is not throttling any network traffic except for users who exceed the 250GB / month limit that is clearly stated in the EULA. Even then you get a written letter before they actually throttle or cut you off.

They did plenty of throttling before the FCC made them stop. They would gladly throttle our traffic and cut us off from sites that compete with their services if they could. That's the point these folks are making.

You can all make the claim that there's plenty of other options out there, but there simply isn't. When it comes to high speed internet there is either cable, dsl/fiber optic. I've only ever had access to comcast's cable. No other providers were available in my homes.

I'm about as libertarian as they come, but I just don't agree that they should be allowed to use the public land that we all pay for and then have free reign to mistreat customers with their monopoly. As taxpayers and owners of the public land they are utilizing, we should have a say in how it gets used. If they don't like it, they are more then welcome to attempt to build an infrastructure on their own private property.

Edit: I also wanted to add that this legislation should really be implemented in the states, not in the federal government. That is one issue that I do have with it.

 

[ATOMonkey]

How fast is the wireless 4G network?

 

[steveh_131]

How fast is the wireless 4G network?

It's ok for browsing if there's only one computer at a time. Not much good for any kind of file downloading or netflix streaming or anything of that nature. I've played with it on my netbook a few times.

 

[ATOMonkey]

I see the whole "net neutrality" thing going away as the wireless speed gets better.

Or if we ever switch over to imbedded signals in the AC.

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

Government regulation=higher prices...always.

 

[IndyBeerman]

How fast is the wireless 4G network?

Only two places right now where there is a legitimate 4G connection in Indiana that I know of and they are both Verizon, West Lafayette, IN and Indianapolis International Airport.

But it is still not on a par level with true high speed fiber optic internet.

 

[IndyBeerman]

I see the whole "net neutrality" thing going away as the wireless speed gets better.

Or if we ever switch over to imbedded signals in the AC.

Internet over Power lines has been touted for YEARS with them still spinning there wheels over it.

When I moved into my current house almost 7 years ago PSI/Cinergy was touting about introducing it, then Duke started touting it to the rural customers in Indiana (seen the paperwork sent to my father in-law) in certain locations about 5 years ago.

It's still a mythical beast that fails to come to life.