Comments on: Net Neutrality Update

By: lemon_lyman

lemon_lyman — Thu, 25 May 2006 17:22:00 +0000

And it’s obvious the Government can’t even handle actual problems that exist…..i.e. katrina relief effort, Health Care, and Social Security…….why is all this time and energy being put into a minute problem that MAY exist somewhere in the future?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 19 May 2006 17:07:25 +0000

Net Neutrality Update

Kevin Thompson has brought up the net neutrality issue and summarized the impact to everyone if net neutraility goes out the window. He brings up some interesting points. I certainly wouldn’t want to share in covering Google’s bandwidth costs.

By: MRT

MRT — Thu, 18 May 2006 05:30:07 +0000

I see the internet as a “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it situation”. Nothing is wrong with the speed of the internet, and there is no proof that a tiered internet would casue any problems to the internet’s productivity. Net Neutrality laws just don’t seem to be necessary at the current time.

By: Net Chick

Net Chick — Tue, 16 May 2006 23:15:17 +0000

Of course the cost of this type of regulation will be passed on to the consumer. This is not net “neutrality” – there’s nothing neutral about it. The government wants to regulate for a problem we haven’t even faced yet. Taxpayers are already paying for the government to look into this issue and the proposed regulation hasn’t even been voted on yet. I hope the leave the internet as it is.

By: noodle

noodle — Mon, 15 May 2006 10:11:07 +0000

I don’t know much about them, but the Pacific Research Institute has a great article on this issue: http://www.pacificresearch.org/press/rel/2006/pr06-02-07.html

In part: “We have only scratched the surface of what high speed communications can do. Let’s not allow government regulation to hinder the new technology we see today and the technology that has yet to be invented.”

By: faank

faank — Mon, 15 May 2006 01:19:30 +0000

Yeah yeah – this is better off left to the market because it is market matter with behemoths on both sides of the aisle. I think Google or Yahoo are a little more worried about their bottom line (why pay for something when the telcos can do it?) than the little guy…gov’t shouldn’t be involved, imho.

By: Hiram Runner

Hiram Runner — Sun, 14 May 2006 23:18:45 +0000

Anytime I see Congress discussing imposing business models on any aspect of our economy, I get serious qualms. I fear that if the advocates of “Net Neutrality” legislation (most of whom are either misinformed or special interests themselves) are successful, we can all kiss the-internet-as-we-know-it bye-bye.

By: tpwk47

tpwk47 — Sun, 14 May 2006 22:48:25 +0000

I agree, and I think that’s the crux of the whole issue. Expanding technologies cost money. There are several ways the costs can be covered. Advocates of net neutrality legislation prefer the Telcos pay, largely because they are unfond of Telcos. However, it is not the role of government to choose winner and losers in these types of debates. This legislation would open the door to some very dangerous ideas down the road with regard to our Internet freedoms.

By: watcher

watcher — Sat, 13 May 2006 22:27:35 +0000

You make a good point. The amount of data transmitted on the Internet is growing exponentially, especially with the boom in VoIP, streaming video, and online gaming. Someone will have to pay for that data to move from place to place and for the improvements to infrastructure that the increased load will demand. If the sites that proliferate the high-demand services aren’t required to share in the costs, then the full burden would fall on the consumer.