Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Cell Phones Presage Future of Non-Neutral Internet

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the 69-cent-per-minute-roaming-charge dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The US cell phone network has no network neutrality. This story on NewsForge takes a look at the obstacles to getting a third-party application running on cell phone networks, and explains why the same obstacles could ruin a non-neutral Internet." (NewsForge and Slashdot are both part of OSTG.)

6 of 155 comments (clear)

  1. I appreciate the metaphor, but... by Weaselmancer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't think it's the best argument for net neutrality. I think the average person might look at that statement and think, "Well, even though different cell companies are linking different networks together - everything seems to work fine. So why not do the same thing with the internet?"

    Of course, we know why. Competing companies would squeeze competitor's offerings unfairly, and that would stifle the current net's model of natural selection. Sub standard service would result.

    So, while I agree with the article I don't think it should be used in arguments about net neutrality. It's possibly misleading to non-geeks.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
  2. Re:O2 blocks TCP & UDP by OverlordQ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    O2 only allows HTTP and blocks TCP and UDP

    You mean HTTP runs on something besides TCP? That's news to me.

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
  3. Its all about the money by AugustZephyr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I assume that if it was profitable for cell phone companies to find a way to create a net neutral infrastructure, there would already be steps in that direction. It seems to me that the biggest reason that they are insisting on controlling their own networks is that it is simply more profitable to them, no surprise the telcom giant want to do the same to the internet. Imagine if ISPs had the same amount of control over the internet that cell phone companies have over their networks now. I dont think what we know as the internet today would have ever gotten as large or productive as it currently is.

  4. Re:Outrageous! by koreth · · Score: 5, Insightful
    A company that builds a networking infrastructure that runs through public land and has government-enforced monopoly powers (e.g. most cable companies have exclusive contracts with the cities they serve, such that a second cable provider is forbidden by law to set up shop) should accept some conditions in return for the use of public resources.

    If we were talking about an actual free market with no externally imposed restrictions, I'd be right there with you. But the fact of the matter is, my cable and phone companies do not have to buy the land they dig up at will to lay cables, and my local government grants them a competition-free marketplace by legal decree. Not exactly a level playing field to begin with.

  5. Re:Competition by Knytefall · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So how come competition hasn't guaranteed neutrality on the cell phone networks? How come existing cell phone carriers aren't in violation of collusion/monopoly laws?

    This is not a situation where competition will magically make things better.

  6. Ringtones: $2.49 Full songs on Internet: $0.99 by robla · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Need I say more?