DISQUS

I don't feel that there really is a so-called "bandwidth crisis" as the ISPs keep on decrying. I think this is about control of the content.

The ISPs stand at a crossroads today (especially teleco's). They can choose to do what they fear the most and become a "dumb pipe" or they can try their best to muscle their way into the content providing business. I think that they have made their choice - and it's not being a "dumb pipe".

The bottom line is that the more control you have the more profit you stand to make.

So are the phone companies going to do away with all of the phony "Regulatory Fees" that they charge us once they get this regulatory relief? Somehow I think not. Give us what we want because we need it, but don't pay any attention to what we do. Perfect.

Wow we need to get some younger people in office! These old farts that know next to nothing about new technology are going to ruin it for all of us.

It's ironic really. This is coming from an entity that routinely will act in the most secretive manner possible and purports this to be for our own good. I don't want to be anonymous - I just want to know that my personal information is going to be safe and that it's not going to be used in a manner that it should not be to either harm me or someone else.

Sadly, I am not shocked much anymore by this.

It all comes down to money and influence. Obviously, this guy Bob has both and sure he's going to tow the party line, that's what he has to do because it's in his best interest to do so for himself and the company he represents.

At the end of the day, the consumer still doesn't have a clue and will continue to be irrelevant to the whole process - just the way that all of these big players want it to be. It really doesn't matter what side of the issue they stand on as they are taking their positions based on what's best for them, not us.

What would be shocking is if something were done for the consumer's best interests. I beleive right now that Network Neutrality is a solution in search of a problem and thus, unecessary at this point.

The scary part about it all is the what if's. If these companies start doing things that warrant Net Neutrality Laws, will it be too late? Will our Government be strong enough to resist the lobbying efforts of these mega-buck corporate entities to protect our right to an open and un-restricted Internet?

Sadly, history has shown that special interest, lobbying, mis-information, and money influences our Government more than what the people want and deserve.

Let's hope it never comes to that. While some companies (mainly At&t;) have hinted at doing things to restrict us, it still doesn't seem to be a problem at this point. Most issues seem to be resolved in the court of public opinion fairly well.

Heh, I stopped caring about "Big Media" right after I got a broadband connection and The Daily Show! :)

They can do what they want, it's sure not going to make them more relevant in a way that matters other than maybe to themselves financially.

So whatever. :)

I don't really see how the issue of "Net Neutraiity" will make a difference either way to be honest. I think the problem has more to do with the sorry state of broadband in our country than anything else.

I wonder how X-Box Live runs in an Asian country? I bet the experience would be different over there. :)

The mere fact that deliberate service degradation is being discussed shows how bad of a threat this is to the Internet as we know it.

Give me a good, solid, reasons why we can trust the Teleco's to not tamper with our service.

Actually, show me some evidence of the Teleco's doing something, anything, that doesn't serve their best interests at the cost of the consumer.

The mere fact that deliberate service degradation is being discussed shows how bad of a threat this is to the Internet as we know it.

Give me a good, solid, reasons why we can trust the Teleco's to not tamper with our service.

Actually, show me some evidence of the Teleco's doing something, anything, that doesn't serve their best interests at the cost of the consumer.

Actually it's great eveidence of stifling innovation. Why not allow for open standards in the first place? As soon as you take out the consumer's ability to use the material legally purchased (like a DVD) in the ways he or she sees fit, then it's stifling innovation. I don't mess with DVD's I legally purchased because I don't want some brutes knocking my door down and arresting me because I made copies of the DVD, or ripped it and streamed it, or used clips for a project or something.

People fear innovating these days and there is a good reason for that. The DMCA allows big media to sue whatever it feels is threatening it's business off the face of the earth legally. All in the name of innovation supposedly.

It's really a simple line of reasoning when you break it all down. MONEY. DRM is a legal way to make the consumer pay for the same content over and over again. Watch that show on TV and enjoy it - but don't TIVO it! Time shifting is stealing! You can buy the DVD of the show if you like it that much though. If you would like to view it on your computer - go to our website and download it for a charge. It's all about choice!

Yeah Right.

So we have a guy that get's paid a lot of money saying there is no problem and we have a guy gettting paid a lot of money to say there is a problem? Clear as mud to me.

The thing I don't understand is this: Why NOT worry about what we are doing to the planet and ourselves? Can anyone say for certain and with no reasonable doubt that we are not making changes to the earth in some way by what we do? I know I can't. How about you?

Anyway, it won't be us that have to worry about whether or not this is true. We will be dead and buried and won't get to see the end of this little story anyway. I love gambling - it's exciting, and I can possibly win big too!