RSS
Companies Reach 'Deal' On Net Neutrality... But What Does That Mean?
from the not-really-their-call,-is-it? dept
A few weeks back, we noted that a bunch of tech and broadband companies were back to "negotiating" around net neutrality, leading us to highlight Adam Smith's famous quote that "people of the same trade" seldom meet together except to create "a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices." Now comes the news that those involved -- including Verizon, AT&T, Skype, Microsoft, NCTA and "others" have "reached an agreement," which might be "stricter" than the Googrizon "framework," but which probably doesn't really apply to wireless networks.
I'm still at a loss as to how this actually matters. The companies can agree to whatever they want, and none of it makes a difference if Congress acts (or the courts say that the FCC is allowed to act). I guess the idea is to think that an "industry agreement" will stave off legislation, which perhaps might work for some time, but still reeks of collusion without consumer input or review.
I'm still at a loss as to how this actually matters. The companies can agree to whatever they want, and none of it makes a difference if Congress acts (or the courts say that the FCC is allowed to act). I guess the idea is to think that an "industry agreement" will stave off legislation, which perhaps might work for some time, but still reeks of collusion without consumer input or review.
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
it measn your fucked
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
manipulating perception
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: manipulating perception
The fact is that when I hear stuff like this, as do most people, we get ANGRY because it is NOT these companies choice to make.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
The UK couldn't stop this:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: manipulating perception
Sounds like they made a big mess out of nothing, so politicians can grandstand for a while.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Telco Politics As Usual
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Telco Politics start with MaBell.
Let me explain it to you in simple terms:
Back in the 1990s, a common telephone copper line was said to only support 300bps. Then as companies innovated and came up with new modulation techniques, we had 1200, 2400, 9600, 14.4, 19.2 and ultimately 28.8. Eventually, speeds topped out at 56k, which was the limit over an analog line. To get faster consumer-grade internet over twisted copper, customers were often told that the phone companies had to lay fiber to the central office, but that wasn't the case. Because it was over telecommunications, the lines had to comply with Federal Wiretap Laws. In the US, ISDN lines were not "consumer grade" and as a result, most companies that offered ISDN did so, but charged $100+ more a month for this service.
At this same time, people in Germany could acquire a 256k ISDN line from their carrier for $20 a month. But because they didn't have the same Federal Phone Tap and Cable Tap requirements, they saw a much higher ISDN broadband penetration rate than the US did. Perhaps this was because the carriers were not legally required to tap their citizens.
Now you have new technologies that are about to be rolled out. The difference is that the carriers control the standards now.
You're silly if you believe that more efficient bandwidth modulation techniques haven't been created and faster rates aren't market ready. But unlike the 1990s, internet and cable traffic remains under Federal Patriot Act laws, and has to be made available under Federal Wiretap Laws. The Patriot Act was enacted during a time of war.
Just remember...
It's still pipes paid for by US Taxpayers under the "High Performance Computing and Communication Act of 1991" All they have to do is place new repeaters and line cards along the existing fiber path to get better bandwidth for all US content providers.
It will be interesting to see if anybody else who uses shared networking like Google follows their lead.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Why the Gov't?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Telco Politics start with MaBell.
As for the U.S. taxpayers owning the network. The "High Performance Computing and Communications Act" was insignificant compared to the private sector investment in the telecommunications networks over the past 100 years. True there may have been some lobbying by certain telcos for that money, but it was hardly enough to say the the citizens own the telecom networks.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
What is China doing?
"There is not secret modulation scheme or technology that the telcos are suppressing. 100 Gbit/s is state of the art at the moment and there are a few different modulation schemes companies use for that. The industry is just now discussing the next step. Pick up an IEEE Communications Magazine and read all about it. As for subscriber line technology there are a few from ADSL2, ADSL2+, and VDSL that continue to squeeze the life out of old copper. The issue is not bandwidth but quality of service. You can have unlimited bandwidth and still suffer QoS problems."
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment