Corey Edwards tensai at
Fri Nov 12 12:56:18 MST 2010

On 11/12/2010 12:03 PM, Steven Alligood wrote:
> On 11/12/10 11:05 AM, Andrew McNabb wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 10:55:26AM -0700, Steven Alligood wrote:
>>> And yes, I assume that every internet provider out there is after
>>> their own best interests, and that eventually, ALL ports for
>>> consumer CLIENT services will be blocked.
>> Are you trying to push me off of the fence with respect to network
>> neutrality? :)  I've been wondering whether legislation is really
>> necessary, and every time I hear a statement like this, it makes me a
>> little more in favor of regulation.
> not at all.  Simply pointing out that business needs drive businesses.
> Quite frankly, I am surprised that most home Internet services still
> allow this kind of behavior, since it costs them more money than you are
> paying them.

I don't buy it. What extra costs are there? Perhaps there are perceived
losses in users who don't purchase extra web hosting, but that's not the
same as an actual cost.

> The only reason is that the average user pays for more than they
> receive.  Sooner or later the companies will figure out that they make
> more profit by restricting these kinds of behaviors.

All this talk of "restricting" makes me think of the winning strategy Ma
Bell has employed. We'll see how well that works. I suggest that
companies would be far more successful offering their customers
opportunities to take advantage of their connections, and not for the
"evil" p2p either. Computer gaming, webcams, remote desktop, VoIP all
come to mind. Who even knows what else is out there? Why should the ISPs
get to dole out access to those innovations?

I agree with Andrew that you're convincing me of the benefits of network


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : 

More information about the PLUG mailing list