Google Matt Cutts' and FCC proposed rules

[katie hunter]

The FCC has proposed rules that would allow paid "fast lanes" on the internet. Many people (including me) not to mention hundreds of tech companies like Amazon, Twitter, Facebook, Google, and Microsoft, Yahoo--plus tons of startups--worry that the FCC's proposed rules will break the internet in very bad ways.

https://twitter.com/mattcutts/status/467003130014486528

Bankrolled by broadband donors, lawmakers lobby FCC on net neutrality

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...et-neutrality/

What do you think about this ? Were the proposed rules by FCC even published yet ?

[RichieBoy67]

Yeah, the fcc has been trying to incorporate some version of this since the start of the internet, even before actually. I hate it and believe it is going to make things very tough for small guys. Ofcourse as usual the large corporations will win out in this country.

I think companies like Amazon will not be effected to much and it may even help them. My worry is for those of us that cannot afford the fastlane.

I think some regulations are good but the internet should be left alone. It is bad enough that the major players who carry the lines are clamping down on bandwidth and starting to enforce limits. If this goes through things will get even worse. It is always the small guys that get hurt.

Thanks for posting that link!

[final kaoss]

I suggest you have a good long read here.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/05...ternet/?page=1

"Special Report This weekend, earnest young men - several of whom appear to have beards - are camping out in Washington DC. They're protesting against "plans to allow a pay-for play internet".

In fact, we think there genuinely are some serious competitive concerns about recent developments in the ever-changing business of carrying bits of data - they're just not the ones you (and the beards) might think. Talking about "net neutrality" raises fascinating questions - but they are far from simple. We think you might like to know what these are.

So we're bringing you a bullshit-free guide to what to what's really happening here - and what you may want to worry about, so you can better direct your energies.

This is strictly non-ideological. There will be no principled arguments for "the public good" or the sanctity of non-intervention. The internet has to work - and work well, well enough to serve everyone - not just the people who shout the loudest, or who lobby well. Today, some groups (such as the disabled) are very poorly served, as we shall see. The internet also has to grow and develop in ways we can't anticipate today, which is still the Jurassic era of networking. If you want to freeze things as they are today - or put another way, if you think it's as good as it gets today, then please stop reading. Here instead is a ten hour video of some unicorns on rainbows - or you may prefer a long train journey)."

[RichieBoy67]

Originally Posted by final kaoss

I suggest you have a good long read here.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/05...ternet/?page=1

"Special Report This weekend, earnest young men - several of whom appear to have beards - are camping out in Washington DC. They're protesting against "plans to allow a pay-for play internet".

In fact, we think there genuinely are some serious competitive concerns about recent developments in the ever-changing business of carrying bits of data - they're just not the ones you (and the beards) might think. Talking about "net neutrality" raises fascinating questions - but they are far from simple. We think you might like to know what these are.

So we're bringing you a bullshit-free guide to what to what's really happening here - and what you may want to worry about, so you can better direct your energies. I am trying to figure out the "beards" thing but I suppose will learn why that matters once I read the complete article. I happen to have a beard now too so I suppose I would fit in.

This is strictly non-ideological. There will be no principled arguments for "the public good" or the sanctity of non-intervention. The internet has to work - and work well, well enough to serve everyone - not just the people who shout the loudest, or who lobby well. Today, some groups (such as the disabled) are very poorly served, as we shall see. The internet also has to grow and develop in ways we can't anticipate today, which is still the Jurassic era of networking. If you want to freeze things as they are today - or put another way, if you think it's as good as it gets today, then please stop reading. Here instead is a ten hour video of some unicorns on rainbows - or you may prefer a long train journey)."

Great read and great quote. This is non ideological. Actually I think the majority of all political parties are against pay for play rules on the net.

As for the article it tries to explain in simple terms but I would rather just read the entire bill when it comes out.