Off Into The Infinite Universe...

Welcome Back My Friends, To The Show That Never Ends...
This is for everyone who has a strange fascination with loopy structures, paradoxes, science, quantum physics, the nature of duality, the internet, cyber culture, philosophy, and any one who has stayed up into the late hours contemplating infinities.If any of you have any contributions for posts, paradoxes, mathematical infinities, or anything that has loopy nature send it to DamntheMachine09@aol.com

Support The Infinite Blog!

Saturday, April 9, 2011

"Preserving the Open Internet" The Battle Continues..




Yesterday was a big day in the world of Internet Service Providers. I'm assuming you guys may have heard of this. The F.C.C (Federal Communications Commission) is trying to pass a "net neutrality" bill that would in effect give the F.C.C (which is a government branch) the ability to regulate and monitor how companies, namely the ISP's, do business, and how they go about censoring information. Remember those internet information caps we talked about a few weeks back? It all could come to pass if the bill passes.  This whole manner can be a little confusing so lets break down the sides, and show whats really happening.

THE F.C.C - This is the party that wants to push the idea of Net Neutrality. They want to say "Hey Comcast you can't censor Surfthechannel, or the Verizon webpage! (Comcast and Verizon are competitors, so they could block you from seeing Verizon's rates!) The F.C.C would give comcast a slap on the wrist. The F.C.C's policy would also do away (maybe) with ISP's tiered internet service. So if you pay 49.99 and get 2mbps speed or if you pay 19.00 for 200 kbs speed, these would be eliminated, and everyone would have the same speed, for a flat rate. This would also probably tell AT&T to rethink their data limit caps.

The Democrats - Most dems are on the side of the F.C.C. Favoring a bigger government intervention. Most feel that the internet is a utility just like water, electricity, and gas, and needs some sort of regulations so its power isn't abused by bigger companies.

The Republicans - Most Reps are on the side of the ISP's in stating that they reserve the right to set costs, and let the buyers select how much they want. Just as you go into a restaurant, you can order a small, or a large. They feel that the internet should remain open, free, and free of government interference.

The ISP's - Verizon, and Comcast are most obviously against this sort of regulation. They want to be able to regulate and direct internet traffic. They want to be able to set their own prices, and tiers, and that's something that the F.C.C wants to control

The Information Providers - The Googles, Amazons, NBC's, and Fox's- They are worried that if the F.C.C gets on a hand on control, that censorship would cause reduced viewing, and less traffic, which is how they get their money.  Think upon this, Comcast which owns NBC could block all access to sites displaying NBC shows, or other competitors.

So this all adds up to finger pointing name calling and lots of accusations about the other party. Yesterday though, the decision was made that the House rejected the proposition of "Net Neutrality". Which means for now, this bill is shot down. Another chance is available to push this through the Senate though, so the battle isn't over. Quite torn, I am between this matter. This all ccomes on the heels of the FCC's demand that AT&T and VERIZON, must share their cell networks with smaller mobile companies, to encourage competition. I'm not quite sure what smaller companies even exist, but whoever they are, now have a piggy back on the two largest mobile communications networks in the world.  Anyway I hope this helps break down whats going on.

34 comments:

  1. Excellent break down, as always with these situations, the answer is somewhere in the middle. By subscribing to a particular company, you do expect certain perks, such as perhaps free streaming of NBC shows on Comcast. Censorship is always wrong and it would be morally wrong to block or charge higher rates just to access outside information. It won't be an issue solved soon.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with pirate above me. Morally wrong is exactly right. +Followed

    ReplyDelete
  3. Best breakdown of the situation I've seen yet.

    ReplyDelete
  4. i dont see anything wrong with what we have right now. if its not broken dont fix it

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm for a free-er internet as it is. The web started in the universities, but the basements of the world are where it grew up. I want to keep it in the basements, and out of the boardrooms.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Tough questions, and not an easy one to answer. I don't want to stifle and discourage the companies from expanding their services. I want to see worldwide broadband services completed in the next 10 years. But I also don't want to pay a ton of money for decent internet speeds. Will regulation make it better or worse? Hard to tell...

    ReplyDelete
  7. This is all going the wrong way.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Keep the internet open is priority! Followed and supporting. alphabetalife.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hmmm, not sure where i stand on this.

    ReplyDelete
  10. google is kind darth vader concerning net neutrality

    ReplyDelete
  11. im with biff. this really is a mess if you ask me.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Torn indeed. The Government starting to "big brother" the internet isn't good at all but neither is the major ISPs gouging the customers once they corner the market.

    ReplyDelete
  13. interesting.. I actually read through this. what do you think about this issue?

    ReplyDelete
  14. It's a tricky issue. While I wouldn't want the government intervening directly on content, the FCC making it so that the internet doesn't become a battlefield for companies at the expense of its users sounds reasonable, and I would love to see AT&T's limited rate plan killed. If there were provisions in the bill defining a certain point that the FCC couldn't go past, I'd probably support it.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Good article. I studied net neutrality in one of my communications classes and it is a very interesting subject!

    ReplyDelete
  16. It's always confusing trying to determine the neutrality of websites....

    ReplyDelete
  17. people will always find ways to cheat these barriers. if anything happens, the pirates will just be more motivated.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I do worry about this issue but feel I lack the understanding to really have an informed opinion about it all. Thank you for the analysis.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Everyone needs to be able to access what they want when they want at great speed. period.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Things can always turn into a mess like this.

    Great post by the way, keep 'em coming!

    ReplyDelete
  21. There once was a funny picture mocking the new ISP services chart where you can choose the internet of your liking. Like a basic pack with youtube and facebook. Then a "commercial package" with ebay and amazon etc.
    Funny at the time but one starts to get uncomfortable that this could become reality someday.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I don't think the internet should be censored, but I do think you should be able to choose to pay more to get a better speed.

    ReplyDelete
  23. google will become even more powerfull as now

    ReplyDelete
  24. Very good read. I still have hope that we don't end up with an internet that is as closed as TV is today. We need to stay in control.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I just hope that P2P services are never closed. Damn government.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Wow, i didn't know a lot of this.

    ReplyDelete