Net neutrality proposal

R S rafazapa at yahoo.com
Thu May 15 02:04:08 PDT 2014






------------------------------
On Thu, May 15, 2014 12:04 AM PDT Andrew Lentvorski wrote:

>On 5/12/14, 12:37 AM, Randall Shimizu wrote:
>> Now one can argue that the Comcast agreement is a violation of net
>> neutrality. But since Netflix consumes so much bandwidth they are forced to
>> take steps to increase it.  The issue is that Netflix is paying for
>> interconnection as opposed transit as they rightly point out.
>> http://blog.netflix.com/2014/04/the-case-against-isp-tolls.html
>
>And this is the problem.  Net neutrality isn't really the issue.
>
>The issue is that *I* already paid Comcast/Time Warner/AT&T etc. to
>deliver my traffic.  The fact that my traffic usage doesn't match their
>predictions is *their problem*--not mine, not Netflix, not Google's, etc..
>
>
>The issue is that Comcast et al. want a second bite at the apple
>*beyond* my having already paid them or they'll degrade *MY* connection.
> Um, excuse me?
>
>
>Personally, I want these jerks classified as common carriers.  They've
>been in the way for so long that I'm willing to let the local and state
>governments see if they can do better.
>
>It would be hard to do worse.

You underestimate government.



More information about the KPLUG-List mailing list