Slashdot Mirror
FCC Backs a Tiered Internet
Going to be extorted writes ""FCC Chief Kevin Martin yesterday gave his support to AT&T and other telcos who want to be able to limit bandwidth to sites like Google, unless those sites pay extortion fees. Martin made it clear in a speech yesterday that he supports such a a "tiered" Internet." Could this be the end of internet innovation?"
Since now these comapnies are making decisions on what and how much sites will be traveling over their pipes, does this mean they lose their common carrier status?
It is time for a second Internet to come into action -- one that is voluntarily connected, one that is run over cabling (or satellite) connections that are not subsidized by any government regime. If we want it, it will happen, we just have to support the initial costs. These costs might be higher but in the long run they're lower because we won't be taxed to subsidize the costs.
this existed before the internet and it was neat but horribly slow.
there were people that set up unix and Xenix machines at borders of LATA's (a phone number that can call two areas as a local call) that would call each other to relay email and gopher requests.
it worked great.
Getting broadband speeds without the telcos involved will be 10000% impossible as they have the governments in their back pocket and do you know anyone that can afford 5000 miles of fiber, all the light gear needed to light it up and who can pay for the right of way access for that fiber?
Honestly our ownly hope is for google to light up all that dark fiber they have been buying and put a major hurt on SBC and the other greedy bastards right where it hurts.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Hold on a second!!
Google has a Wireless network for free...... and loads of dark fiber.
Whats to stop them connecting the two, and giving everyone free wireless via their OWN google web. Yes i fear the day when the web runs via one source (in this case google) but at least it will be a source whom generally gets things right and fair.
That or we will end up with "binded" lines where people upstream run programs to allow us to find the fastest route to said host.
Think of peer to peer style, with dns's run by each user. Self updating and authicating. Some people would run sites as gateways to other networks from say, Google net to msnWeb, and in return they would have some ad's on a page which appears "Please wait while you are transfered to xxx, if you wish click the ad as you wait, ad will be opened in a new window....".
Maybe im a crazy fool, but its them prosing a monolopy on the internet.
- http://www.milkme.co.uk
So the idea is to blame websites for generating interest, and so increasing bandwidth costs? So many problems
1. Google is a very clean site, MUCH less clutter than so many other search engines - I'd award it for saving bandwidth, considering people are always going to use SOME search engine.
2. Google's good. Really good. ISPs will probably save money getting their customers to use google rather than trawling round irrelevant websites looking for info
3. If we blame sites of generating so much traffic and bandwidth, what stops us blaming protocols or programs? Mr. Cohen's bittorrent generates a hell of a lot of traffic, why can't be blame him for providing this service if we can blame google for providing theirs?
Have you tried to buy dark fiber from a telco before?
:(
Ain't gonna happen. I've tried. I've been trying to months now. Sprint, Charter, Ma Bell, you name it. They all have dark fiber I could simply light up and my work would be done, but none of them will do it. They want to light it and sell me "service", at a price that winds up well exceeding the price of the dark fiber. My choice winds up being having to overbuild them, because none of them will sell. At least not to the little guy, so Google might have an advantage here.
To put this into perspective, when I first started looking, I was being quoted $35/ft for fiber, "just to get to the street". Once you get to "the street", now you're having to shut down roads and such, so we're at closer to $100/ft. That, and my municipality has rules against putting fiber on poles, so you have to bore conduit underground...unless of course you're a big media company with a presence in the area (**cough** Charter **cough**), in which case they get to ignore the rules.
So for me to run fiber 1/4 of a mile to link my two sites? (btw, I'm going to user optical and rf backhauls, but I'd sleep a lot better with a "hardline") would cost nearly 1/2 million dollars. 1/4 mile!
Insanity knows no bounds.
Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).
There's no need for the inflamatory story language. Trying to say that a tiered internet is bad is like trying to explain why decapitation is bad. You're wasting words. We're all with you.
Better to sound rational to convince those who don't understand. A non-neutral net is a terrible thing to contemplate.
At the minimum, neutrality protects the new marketplace. It helps all us smoes enjoy the good parts of a free market system. Calling for an end to neutrality is like calling for an end to racketeering laws in the real world. Sure, someone is going to make more money, but at the expense of the market as a whole.
And beyond brain-dead economic analysis, the internet has a kernel of world-improving good, with electronic journal archives for the sciences, free encyclopedias, and so forth. (Of course, wrapped around this kernel are gigabytes of porn...)
Who invited the FCC to the party anyway? Someone tell them their headlights are on so we can lock them out when they go to check.
Use the Firehose to mod down Second Life stories!
Oh well not entirely. Because on the internet BOTH parties pay. Google pays a hosting bill as well. Bit like you would need to pay a subscription fee to receive mail as well pay for postage for sending mail.
What the new idea is to add yet another fee for the middle man. For the snail mail example imagine that you had to pay the post office to accept your letter, the receiver had to have a subscription to have a mail adress and now the mailman wants a cut for delivering the message at the normal speed.
As for your road example, it would be true if the car maker charged you extra for when your car is not stuck in traffic. Do not pay and your steering goes wobbly above 20 miles per hour.
No, there really is no precedent for this. The closest thing is the mafia who is famous for trying to get a cut of whatever money is being made even if they have no right to do so.
The telecoms are already getting paid by both google and the enduser for handling the traffic. This is just a way to get even more money.
Then again, there certainly is plenty of precedent for greed.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Actually, I have tried to light dark fiber, and I was successful! It was during the dotcom days, in downtown Boston no less. The goal was to get a T1 installed into the office, but the install date was 3+ months away from any carrier. I hate Verizon more than I can describe, so they were absolutely NOT an option. In the machineroom was some fiber, and whatever termination box is used for that sorta thing. So, I called-up my buddy at a local CLEC, gave him the circuit ID, and he had it up and up, on, and running in less than a month (!!!). While I've never had this level of service EVER in 10+ years, it pays to know people, to call them, and to ask the right questions.
Then there was the issue with getting Cable TV, which the cable companies said wasn't available. Kinda strange since our office came with a bizarre A/V system, with multiple TVs. They really told us that there was no way to run cable to our office building. So, I did what any geek would have done, I went into the wiring closet, and connected the RF cable from the breakout box, to the other breakout box -- which was conveniently labeled with our suite number. Viola! Instant cable TV in a high-rise building in downtown Boston. I used to set up the TVs to play Star Trek TOS from the Sci-Fi channel -- y'know, with the closed captions. Gave the office a fun atmosphere, I thought.
Just because they say they can't do it, doesn't mean they can't do it, just that the person on the other end of the phone doesn't want to bother with it. Move around obstructive people, and you can move mountains -- or get your office lit.
Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.