Net Neutrality Is Marxist?

[Steven Alligood]

On 04/12/2010 11:49 AM, Corey Edwards wrote:
> Steven Alligood wrote:
>    
>> ROFL.
>>
>> It should be illegal to put up advertising billboards, just because you
>> don't like them?
>>
>> How about commercials on TV?  Let's make those illegal as well, how dare
>> they put advertising in my shows?
>>
>> What about the ads on the back of the frozen pizza you bought at
>> Smiths?  How outrageous.
>>
>> The only thing I see as UnAmerican here is the limiting of people making
>> money with completely legal methods.
>>      
> Your strawmen aren't completely accurate analogies to how the Internet
> works. I'd say it's more like the phone company interrupting a phone
> call to bring you a sponsored message. Or the mailman slipping
> advertising into your letters. There has always been an unspoken
> understanding that packets, like phone calls or letters, will be
> delivered as-is and not modified in process.
>
>    

Actually, my analogies would be more like dialing a wrong number and 
getting advertising (don't think they wouldn't do it if they could 
figure out how) or the post office bringing advertising along with your 
mail (um, they actually do that).

The original complaint was Sprint redirecting your dns to theirs and 
still giving you all the real sites out there, but anything that didn't 
lookup would give you an advertisement.  Which isn't much different than 
all the SEOs out there grabbing up any and all domains that sound normal 
or are typos of normal and showing advertising.  Which also happens.

I am pretty sure Sprint doesn't actually insert ads in to the sites you 
go to.  Well, at least not without that site getting money from Sprint.

>> In fact, the same thing applies to Comcast and blocking any and all
>> ports that they deem abusive.
>>      
> Same thing with the phone or letter analogy. If the postmaster knew
> there was a bomb in your letter, he wouldn't deliver it. Those are
> exceptional cases and I would suggest that clear public policies about
> what they consider abusive behavior and what they will do about it would
> be appropriate.
>    
But the post office can make those rules on whatever criteria they want 
without ever consulting the customer.  Same goes for Comcast; they can, 
and should, make any rules that are in their own best interest, and that 
of their stockholders.

>    
>>   If their business model precludes your
>> torrents, then find another ISP.   And don't argue that you cannot; the
>> Internet is NOT a basic human right, nor is TV, cable, or even frozen
>> pizza.
>>      
> And yet of all those examples, Internet is by far the least regulated.
> Just because something is not a basic human right doesn't mean we
> shouldn't have standards. There is not enough competition for the market
> to simply sort out all these problems.
>
>    

So, we need more regulation because it has helped all those other 
markets?  Back to your example, regulation has made the phone service so 
much better than it was before?

The only thing that made telco costs come down, and fees lower has been 
the introduction of competition (aka, VoIP providers).  Regulation 
actually raised prices and lowered the quality of service.

-Steve

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5515 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://plug.org/pipermail/plug/attachments/20100412/29f3dad8/attachment.bin