Net neutrality....do you want AT&T dictating access policies to the net?
Net Neutrality is being debated right now in the Senate.
Large telecom companies, and cable are flexing their muscles, and saying that their investment in infrastructure gives them the right to determine who can use their "pipes", for how much, and at what speed you will receive it.
In fact...."Ed Whitacre, CEO of recently merged SBC and AT&T: "There's going to have to be some mechanism for these people who use these pipes to pay for the portion they're using. Why should they be allowed to use my pipes? The Internet can't be free in that sense, because we and the cable companies have made an investment and for a Google or Yahoo! or Vonage or anybody to expect to use these pipes [for] free is nuts!"
They claim unregulated service is the only way for true innovation to occur.....and they want to overturn current practices.
Several excellent sites are useful in sorting this out.
I recommend
About US Politics
where you will find the following quote:
"According to proponents of network neutrality, what is at stake is the freedom to access whatever online information (content) strikes your fancy, using whatever device you wish. Rather than focusing on their responsibility to maximize network performance, telecos and cable companies want to control access to content, either by charging additional service fees or by prioritizing some content over other content.
The threat is not hypothetical: technology exists that facilitates packet discrimination and companies have used it. For example:"
followed by alarming examples.
And take a good look at another in depth site:
FreePress There is a June 23 live blog of the session on Today's News...andt the site in general has great in depth info.
To see how deceptive the other side is view this video:
InternetFutureSlickbutWrong
and read the argument link. Without the background above, this argument could fool an incurious mind.
Large telecom companies, and cable are flexing their muscles, and saying that their investment in infrastructure gives them the right to determine who can use their "pipes", for how much, and at what speed you will receive it.
In fact...."Ed Whitacre, CEO of recently merged SBC and AT&T: "There's going to have to be some mechanism for these people who use these pipes to pay for the portion they're using. Why should they be allowed to use my pipes? The Internet can't be free in that sense, because we and the cable companies have made an investment and for a Google or Yahoo! or Vonage or anybody to expect to use these pipes [for] free is nuts!"
They claim unregulated service is the only way for true innovation to occur.....and they want to overturn current practices.
Several excellent sites are useful in sorting this out.
I recommend
About US Politics
where you will find the following quote:
"According to proponents of network neutrality, what is at stake is the freedom to access whatever online information (content) strikes your fancy, using whatever device you wish. Rather than focusing on their responsibility to maximize network performance, telecos and cable companies want to control access to content, either by charging additional service fees or by prioritizing some content over other content.
The threat is not hypothetical: technology exists that facilitates packet discrimination and companies have used it. For example:"
followed by alarming examples.
And take a good look at another in depth site:
FreePress There is a June 23 live blog of the session on Today's News...andt the site in general has great in depth info.
To see how deceptive the other side is view this video:
InternetFutureSlickbutWrong
and read the argument link. Without the background above, this argument could fool an incurious mind.
posted by Anne Damm at 11:37 AM
0 comments
