Virus In Training

Doing my part to save the internet! by mozey
May 17, 2007, 7:04 pm
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , ,

One of the main concepts which the Internet was built on is called “net neutrality”. You can find out the rigorous definition of it in its wikipedia page. However, here is a shorter definition of it:

Net Neutrality prevents Internet providers from speeding up or slowing down Web content based on its source, ownership or destination.” (

Keeping that in mind, few of the big telecom companies are trying to pass a law which allows them to just the opposite of that!. Why do they do it you ask? Well, Money!

A pictures says a thousand words, imagine what a video does!, please enjoy:

3 Comments so far
Leave a comment

… I agree, but without the ‘GateKeepers’, (such as comcast, Verizon, Shaw…etc) there will be no immediate maintenance and no service just simply because there will be no paying customers to pay the Administrators. Another thing is that the rest of the bandwidth is given to the Emergency service (which I thnk should have top priority), so we all have to share the other half of the ‘pipe’ among ourselves.

Comment by Karim

Well!, they allready charge money!, they are triyng to do it for MORE money from some websites. That is TOTAL capitalism!, what the hell man!, work for the people not the other way around!

Comment by ViN

vin – I work with the Hands Off the Internet coalition on this issue and would like to raise a few points if I may.

First, “net neutrality” isn’t one of the main concepts or founding principles of the internet. As the wikipedia entry mentions, so called “net neutrality” never applied to cable broadband connections, which account for a majority of all broadband connections in the US today.

The entry also mentions,

“Bob Kahn, the Internet Protocol’s co-inventor, says the term net neutrality is a regulatory slogan, which he opposes: “If the goal is to encourage people to build new capabilities, then the party that takes the lead in building that new capability, is probably only going to have it on their net to start with and its probably not going to be on anybody else’s net.[5]” Kahn’s view is shared by most senior internetworking engineers, with the notable exception of the other co-inventor of IP, Vint Cerf, now a Google employee.[6]”

Second, the law that is currently proposed is the Dorgan-Snowe bill and it would enact strict net neutrality regulations. This would freeze the broadband market in place removing incentive for investment and innovation.

Third, if you’re a fan of videos, I offer this video from the Fiber to The Home council, explaining how these regulation won’t benefit anyone.

A more logical approach as advocated by David Farber and Michael Katz is to rely on current laws and regulations should any of the numerous hypothetical scenarios that net neutrality supporters claim actually come true.

“Public policy should intervene where anti-competitive actions can be identified and the cure will not be worse than the disease. Policymakers must tread carefully, however, because it can be difficult, if not impossible, to determine in advance whether a particular practice promotes or harms competition. Antitrust law generally takes a case-by-case approach under which private parties or public agencies can challenge business practices and the courts require proof of harm to competition before declaring a practice illegal. This is a sound approach that has served our economy well.”


Comment by HOTI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: