Ironworks Gaming Forum - View Single Post - Net neutrality finished in the United States?

robertthebard · 06-12-2006, 10:02 AM

Ok, I already pay more for internet services than my mom, for example. I use broadband, and she's on dial up. I guess my thing is that even after reading the available material, I don't really understand what the goal is. Would nonpassage deny me access to the forums I visit, or increase the cost of my own website/blog, which I rarely use anyway? Will Yahoo be able to leverage me into paying more to insure that my website comes up on their search engine? If this is the case, then this is a bad situation. If I were making thousands of dollars a month through my site, then I probably wouldn't even notice much, but as a very low end consumer, it could push me out of existence, online anyway.
So far, I see this as a battle between content providers, and the pipe suppliers they use. The little providers, such as myself, are completely overlooked in the struggle. I want to know what it means to me, not what it means to Yahoo, or to Bell South. Should Bell South be allowed to "guarantee" a site gets hits because of the rate they pay? No way. That is discriminatory, to say the least. Should I have to pay a premium, above and beyond what I already pay to Cox Communications, to guarantee I have all the bandwidth that is available for my online forrays, be they message boards, or gaming? No, I already pay for that. Otherwise, I'd use dialup...From my perspective, and excuse the ramblings, it seems like allowing the pipe owners to set policy is a bad thing. Some of the more guru type of gurus should try to explain exactly what the limit on bandwidth really is, as so far, on the net in general, I haven't notice many shortages of it, except for the massive hits on a particular site for a download, but that's not net wide, that's a local shortage. Shortage may not be the right word, but extreme usage on one site will cause problems. Does this mean that the next time, assuming the pipe providers get their way, there is a shortage of bandwidth from a particular site, that they are going to step in and increase bandwidth to clear the bottleneck of data?

06-12-2006, 10:02 AM	#15
robertthebard Xanathar Thieves Guild Join Date: March 17, 2001 Location: Wichita, KS USA Age: 62 Posts: 4,537	Ok, I already pay more for internet services than my mom, for example. I use broadband, and she's on dial up. I guess my thing is that even after reading the available material, I don't really understand what the goal is. Would nonpassage deny me access to the forums I visit, or increase the cost of my own website/blog, which I rarely use anyway? Will Yahoo be able to leverage me into paying more to insure that my website comes up on their search engine? If this is the case, then this is a bad situation. If I were making thousands of dollars a month through my site, then I probably wouldn't even notice much, but as a very low end consumer, it could push me out of existence, online anyway. So far, I see this as a battle between content providers, and the pipe suppliers they use. The little providers, such as myself, are completely overlooked in the struggle. I want to know what it means to me, not what it means to Yahoo, or to Bell South. Should Bell South be allowed to "guarantee" a site gets hits because of the rate they pay? No way. That is discriminatory, to say the least. Should I have to pay a premium, above and beyond what I already pay to Cox Communications, to guarantee I have all the bandwidth that is available for my online forrays, be they message boards, or gaming? No, I already pay for that. Otherwise, I'd use dialup...From my perspective, and excuse the ramblings, it seems like allowing the pipe owners to set policy is a bad thing. Some of the more guru type of gurus should try to explain exactly what the limit on bandwidth really is, as so far, on the net in general, I haven't notice many shortages of it, except for the massive hits on a particular site for a download, but that's not net wide, that's a local shortage. Shortage may not be the right word, but extreme usage on one site will cause problems. Does this mean that the next time, assuming the pipe providers get their way, there is a shortage of bandwidth from a particular site, that they are going to step in and increase bandwidth to clear the bottleneck of data? __________________ To those we have lost; May your spirits fly free. Interesting read, one of my blogs.