WSJ: ISP Victory on Net Neutrality

December 2, 2010 -

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski spoke Wednesday, offering a roadmap to net neutrality rules and regulations that he and other commissioners will discuss and inevitably vote on at the FCC's December 21 meeting. One of the things that many journalists noted was that the Chairman seemed to have backpedaled on many key points. Besides excluding wireless carriers from the equation, Genachowski mentioned "usage-based pricing."

Naturally, companies such as Comcast, Time Warner and AT&T see some of the concessions the FCC has made in its latest proposal as a strong victory for their side. Genachowski's support for pay-as-you-go pricing is a victory for these companies because it declares that broadband providers have the power to charge users for bandwidth they consume.

This should be especially troubling for anyone that enjoys watching movies through Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and Wii. A typical streamed movie uses up 4 GB of bandwidth. Naturally, if a company forces you to use a data plan, then you will be less likely to use services like Netflix, Hulu, and more because it is just not economical. Of course, you can always watch those movies on Pay-Per-View...

The Wall Street Journal Blog offers a good overview of why what the FCC wants to do later this month is not a victory for consumers.


Comments

Re: WSJ: ISP Victory on Net Neutrality

Jesus, how can people misunderstand NN so profoundly? The basic principles of network neutrality is that ALL data gets treated the same. An ISP like Comcast could charge you for all data over 250gb a month, or disconnect you, but they couldn't charge you extra for just one type of data, i.e. only video data. They also couldn't disallow lawful content on their networks, i.e. no more throttling bit torrent. Anyway, I'll take what I can get at this point, as these companies abuse their position, as is sure to happen, we'll see more regulation, although I am not hopeful. We need forced line sharing in this country.

Re: WSJ: ISP Victory on Net Neutrality

This is not Net Neutrality, is IPS forcing a tier-based pricing. 

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

Re: WSJ: ISP Victory on Net Neutrality

This is exactly what net neutrality was intended to prevent and now it's standing on our doorstep!

This is what will happen once this new measure is passed.

dvice.com/archives/2009/10/net-neutrality.php

-Greevar

-Greevar

"Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."

Re: WSJ: ISP Victory on Net Neutrality

The United States of America: By the corporations, for the corporations.

Re: WSJ: ISP Victory on Net Neutrality

Oh, editor note.. the 4GB quotes was not bandwidth, it was total transfer.  Bandwidth is how much you can transfer at a time (bytes/second), which is a differnt type of cap.

Re: WSJ: ISP Victory on Net Neutrality

I will have to read more before really commenting on this comprimise.. but charging one's own customers based off usage I have no issue about.... though I am displeased that wireless providers would be exempted since we went though this already with wired connections decades ago with all the same basic arguments....  wireless providers are raking in piles of money while producing an inferrior service when compared to other countries.... they do not need more special protection, they need to be forced to compete.

Re: WSJ: ISP Victory on Net Neutrality

Okay, that is not what Net Neutrality is about.  We charge people for water and electricity based on how much they use too.  That makes sense.  What we're talking about here is making sure that they don't throttle your connection based on the type of traffic or the source/destination of said traffic.  Basically, you get the connection that you paid for, whatever you use it for.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MechaTama31AE: Probably snarky commentary on this: http://www.gamepolitics.com/2014/08/29/principle-player-leland-yee-arms-trading-case-dies08/30/2014 - 8:43pm
Andrew EisenConster - Don't know. Got a link to whatever you're referring to?08/30/2014 - 7:04pm
ConsterWait, what's this about Leland Yee eliminating witnesses?08/30/2014 - 5:50pm
IanCBroke my EA boycott to pick up Plants vs Zombies Garden Warfare. Loving it. Still hate EA though. But i like Popcap. Gah.08/30/2014 - 6:01am
MaskedPixelantehttp://m.tickld.com/x/something-you-never-realized-about-guardians-of-the-galaxy Right in the feels.08/29/2014 - 6:56pm
AvalongodAgain I think we're conflating the issue of whether Sarkeesian's claims are beyond critique (no they're not) and whether its ever appropriate to use sexist language, let alone physical threats on a woman to intimidate her (no it isn't)08/29/2014 - 5:04pm
prh99Trolling her or trying to assail her integrity just draws more attention (Streisand effect?). Which is really not what the trolls want, so the only way to win (if there is a win to be had) is not to play/troll.08/29/2014 - 5:02pm
prh99Who cares, just don't watch the damn videos if you don't like her. Personally, I don't care as far as she is concerned as long there are interesting games to be played.08/29/2014 - 4:34pm
Andrew EisenZip - And yet, you can't cite a single, solitary example. (And no one said you hated anyone. Along those lines, no one claimed Sarkeesian was perfect either.)08/29/2014 - 3:51pm
Andrew EisenSaint's Row: Gat Out of Hell was just announced for PC, PS3, PS4, Xbox 360 and Xbox One making it the 150th game For Everything But Wii U! Congratulations Deep Silver!08/29/2014 - 3:49pm
ZippyDSMleeI do not hate them jsut think its mostly hyperlobe.08/29/2014 - 3:40pm
Andrew EisenSleaker - I'd say that's likely. From my experience, most who have a problem with Sarkeesian's videos either want to hate them in the first place (for whatever reason) or honestly misunderstand what they're about and what they're saying.08/29/2014 - 3:16pm
james_fudgeWe appreciate your support :)08/29/2014 - 2:55pm
TechnogeekIt gives me hope that maybe, just maybe, the gaming community is not statistically indistinguishable from consisting entirely of people that your average Xbox Live caricature would look at and go "maybe you should tone it down a little bit".08/29/2014 - 2:49pm
TechnogeekI just want to say that while I've disagreed with the staff of this site on several occasions, it's still good to see that they're not automatically dismissing Anita's videos as a "misandrist scam" or whatever the preferred dismissive term is these days.08/29/2014 - 2:49pm
E. Zachary KnightZippy, So you can't find even one?08/29/2014 - 1:04pm
ZippyDSMleeAndrew Eisen:Right because shes prefect and never exaggerates... *rolls eyes*08/29/2014 - 12:53pm
SleakerAnd honestly, nearly all of the games she references, or images she depicts I've always cringed at and wondered why they were included in games to begin with, from pinups through explicit sexual depictions or direct abuse. I think it's cheap storytelling.08/29/2014 - 12:35pm
Sleaker@AE - aren't most people fundamentally misunderstanding her at this point? haha.. On a related note I think a lot of the backlash is coming from males that think she is telling them their 'Generic Male Fantasy' is bad and wrong.08/29/2014 - 12:33pm
Andrew EisenAnd no, I don't think the female community would be upset over the performance of a case study in and of itself. Possibly the mostivations behind such a study, the methodology or conclusions but not the mere idea of a case study.08/29/2014 - 12:29pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician