Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

In Net Neutrality, It's Jeffersonet Vs. Edisonet

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the fears-for-tiers dept.

PetManimal writes "Curt Monash has a middle way on the Net neutrality debate. He writes that the classic 'Jeffersonet' — which includes e-mail, instant messaging, much e-commerce, and most websites created in the first 13 or so years of the Web — is 'the greatest tool in human history to communicate research, teaching, news, and political ideas, or to let tiny businesses compete worldwide,' and cannot be compromised by a tiered Internet. On the other hand, a reliable, tiered scheme is required for what he calls the 'Edisonet' — which consists of 'communication-rich applications such as entertainment, gaming, telephony, telemedicine, teleteaching, or telemeetings of all kinds.' Commenting on Monash's proposal, blogger Richi Jennings points to a lack of investment in Internet infrastructure and IPv6 technologies at the root of the problem: '...if an application writer makes assumptions that ignore realities such as the speed of light or temporary congestion, their application's going to behave badly. But no premium QoS in the world is going to help that. My sense is still that the ISPs that are complaining about net neutrality are simply being greedy and don't want to invest money to cope with the growth in usage.'"

2 of 172 comments (clear)

  1. Stupid by originalnih · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Basic economics is not something to be poo-pooed away. Ridiculing the companies and people who helped build the internet we have today and criticising their opinions on its future development is a sure-fire way to fuck your credibility in the arse. I hope like hell nobody listens to this shit.

    Net neutrality is bullshit.

  2. Except by Colin+Smith · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    ow, we'll have great roads to places we wouldn't have gone in the first place, and crappy roads to very promising and desirable places. If you contro, here people can go easily, you control the economy. Sorry, this is utter, utter junk. What're you, a sheep?

    Nobody would bother to build a road to a location people didn't want to go, huge investment, fuck all traffic, and they'd make much more money building more roads to places people do want to go.

    Even then the analogy is bollocks because you can choose your ISP. If one is crap, then there are plenty of others.

    --
    Deleted