Net Neutrality "A Load of B*****Ks!!"

[Middleend]

Sorry but I'm my freedom soapbox again.....but this is important it will effect us allif we keep allowing the "man" to give it to us!!

 

I had never heard of Net Neutrality until today....but I saw this video and once I got past the beary guys and listened to what they were saying I was appalled. It's the Fields but way back to the beginning, where once a land owner could do what s/he wanted to with their own land, and then the rich and powerful started fencing them in. It's beginning to happen now on the Internet ( god i hope this isn't a hoax!!) imagine not having the freedom to trade, view or access the sites you want to because someone you are paying for access is controlling what you can see or interact with, based on the size of that sites wallet!! There goes free speech and free choise right there.

 

The new CEO of Virginmedia stated in an interview recently that Net neutrality is a "load of ********!!" and that they are already talking with companies about improving their download speeds over other that will be slow laned!!

 

Anyway watch this vid, see what the beardy guys have got say and then, make your mind up about all things Virgin.

 

http://stopvirgin.movielol.org/

 

If I wasn't given the fuel I wouldn't be so Angry ...... honest:o

[The Geoff]

It's completely correct - for example, I get very fast downloads from a certain website simply because it thinks (for some reason ) that I'm using a nice expensive bit of Mr Job's hardware.

 

I'm not, but it thinks I am, so I get preferential download speeds.

 

Net nuetrality doesn't exist, and never has. Why do you think you pay more for "8Mb"?

[Middleend]

It's one thing for someone you have a direct relationship with to be impartial based on criteria such as loyalty, freindship etc but quite something else when an unsolicited third party influences that relationship.

 

I would have though a Linux evangelist like yourself would be hopping mad about this. Microsoft or Apple don't stop or slow down the performance of their systems because you'rr running Linux. They provide a choice for the individual, and operate on a level playing field where service, performance and value are key to your experience and their success. Even Google's mantra is "Do No Harm"

 

You buy your 8mb to suite your own personal needs, and expect the service to be the same no matter what YOU want to view or participate in. If ....sorry when...Virginmedia implement this you will pay for 8mb but if they don't have a specail relationship with Flexifoil for example but do with A N Other kite forum then your experience will be diminished if not destroyed and therefore your freedom of choice has been effected.

 

If Virgin do this, without suffering then others will follow suit and then before you know the uniquely free and democratic environment that is the internet will disappear. Let alone the cost of everything will increase again, while a select few get fatter. If you

 

It will be like:

 

Mugabe saying to his opposition and country, go ahead have an election but I'm going to stay in power anyway.

 

Like China saying to Tibet sure practice your religion but your spiritual leader can't live here.

 

Like Gordon Brown sorry Tblair saying sure you have the right to protest but you've got to get approval from the police first.

 

A landowner and a kiter talking about working together and the "man" saying sure but only for 28 day period in two months of the year because kiting is a motorsport.

 

Totally Bogus and fuelled by money and self interest.....Anyway you have a choise stop using Virgin Products and show Virgin and the other ISP's out there that they can't act with impunity or let them get away with it and give it to you good. I am a long time Virgin fan, I worked for Virgin Atlantic, I have a Virgin Card and I use Virgin as and ISP, but Branson's rich enough and planning to start a stampede over your right to Free Access, Free Speech and Free Choice.

 

Well that's all I have to say about that..........

[eeyore]

i'm about to sign up with them..

[Middleend]

That's the beauty of Freedom of information and freedom of choice . I believe you can still put a stop to the process if you feel that's what you want to do.

[Faceblast]

Isn’t Virgin just over subscribed ISP who lures new customers with cheap monthly fees?

They admitted traffic shaping and stuff because they can’t provide what they promising to such big amount of customers.

Obviously they keep quiet about that when you “about to sign up”

[dreadycraig]

Isn’t Virgin just over subscribed ISP who lures new customers with cheap monthly fees?

They admitted traffic shaping and stuff because they can’t provide what they promising to such big amount of customers.

Obviously they keep quiet about that when you “about to sign up”

 

Just wait til Virgin announce thier 50Meg broadband

[Middleend]

Isn’t Virgin just over subscribed ISP who lures new customers with cheap monthly fees?

They admitted traffic shaping and stuff because they can’t provide what they promising to such big amount of customers.

Obviously they keep quiet about that when you “about to sign up”

 

Probably, have been with them for years. So not sure. But I do know that no matter how fast they say their service is UP to it all depends on the switch station. . Like for me it's only 3.....the wife is happy 'cos she thinks their card's a rip off too.......

[eeyore]

Isnt Virgin just over subscribed ISP who lures new customers with cheap monthly fees?

They admitted traffic shaping and stuff because they cant provide what they promising to such big amount of customers.

Obviously they keep quiet about that when you about to sign up

 

They tell you about that bandwitih shaping and otherstuff. Its in the t&c's you did read them before signing up...

[eeyore]

Isnt Virgin just over subscribed ISP who lures new customers with cheap monthly fees?

They admitted traffic shaping and stuff because they cant provide what they promising to such big amount of customers.

Obviously they keep quiet about that when you about to sign up

 

They tell you about that bandwitih shaping and otherstuff. Its in the t&c's you did read them before signing up...

[Bertie]

if virgin do this people will get annoyed and change, shirley?

 

i certainly would

[Middleend]

I would hope so, I know I am, but if everyone else starts doing it then where's the choice gone??

[Bertie]

if everyone else does it, im going to make a company damn quick that doesnt do it!

[Middleend]

if everyone else does it, im going to make a company damn quick that doesnt do it!

 

Delay due to majorly amazing time being had at A08

 

Yeah and you'll charge how much..... ...as soon as you restrict supply, demand increases and so does price......oh and yes the answer to the thread about kiters being geeks.....I guess I'm going to have to own up and say yes, I must be.....hmmmmmmm

[The Geoff]

 

I would have though a Linux evangelist like yourself would be hopping mad about this. Microsoft or Apple don't stop or slow down the performance of their systems because you'rr running Linux. They provide a choice for the individual, and operate on a level playing field where service, performance and value are key to your experience and their success. Even Google's mantra is "Do No Harm"

 

Not sure I entirely get the analogy - MS or Apple could slow their systems down because I'm running Linux....but it wouldn't affect me....because I'm running Linux....

 

Whilst I love the concept of net neutrality, the simple fact of the matter is there are a lot of big companies who have paid a lot of money towards big underground cables. Companies don't generally do things out of altruism, and they have a right to make money from their investment. I don't see anything wrong with a company giving preferential treatment to their own customers though.

 

Give it a few years and there will be open-source satellites up (running Windows, obviously ), and we can all be free of the big nasty multinationals, but for the moment....well, they own the cables.

Governments can block or slow down net traffic - in fact, I can if I want, on a very local level (ie stuff leaving my servers).

 

The internet isn't free - there's a lot of real grunt work in the background, laying cables and such, and we've been extraordinarily lucky so far that the companies who do that have found enough profit from simply selling us access.

[Middleend]

I am happy to pay for access to a network of cables dug out of the ground at much sweat and cost, I'm even happy to pay for the satellites that hopefully will arrive....I agree with profit as a motive. But what I object to is the fact that our free access is in effect censored for no other reason then greed. I haven't noticed a telecoms company issueing any profit's warnings lately have you?

 

Contrary to popular myth Greed is Bad and it doesn't stop once the line has been crossed it accelerates. Which is what will happen when they start charging sites for preferential treatment. The high street will move onto the net and freedom of choice, variety and creativity will suffer as the £1 determines what we can see......oh.....and again good old Mugabe springs to mind along with China, Stalin, the stazzy etc......

[Mell1599968579]

I am a bit confused.

What Virgin seem to be doing is business and that’s it. They can do what they like with their equipment, business and customers to a certain extent. Whether you choose to go with them is entirely your choice and if you do not well, that’s a bit of business they will not be getting.

 

Isn’t this no different than a tied pub selling only the beer from its tied brewery in a manner of speaking?

 

Why should any ISP not be paid some amount of money by any business or company or anybody else for that matter, to allow their ‘message’ to be carried across the ISP’s bandwidth? Surely as times change traditional advertising revenue will decrease (as is already happening) and other sources must be found. ITV is ‘free’ providing you put up with adverts, BBC on the other hand is not. In fact you even have to pay the BBC to receive ITV. Surely it’s a simple case of ‘he whoever pays most will get the greatest benefit’ from a technology that somebody else has invested in. Is that a sin?

The only option available is to create a co-operative ISP that supplies ALL access to ALL sites and the members pay for it. However, that may turn out to be expensive and as their wouldn’t be the option of a revenue from any of the content providers how long would it last? I sometimes think that it is forgotten that the NET was originally provided as a means for the yanks to be able to communicate between the military and the uni’s etc., the fact that we have access at all is surely a blessing. Any access is better than none eh?

[Middleend]

I think the point is being missed here. The complaint is not about ISP chargeing for their services for you and I its about controlling what we can view by purposely effecting your viewing experience based purely on how much any site is prepared to pay to the ISP.

 

It's like walking down the street only the opacity of glass in the shopfront's is controlled by some unelected third party. Now you want to look at Racekites shop window and you've also heard that Flexifoil has something equally cool on it. Only Racekites can afford to pay the man controlling glass some more (on top of what they're paying for advertising, and what your're paying for permission to be on the street anyway) than Flexifoil so when you go to Racekites Window the image is crisp, interaction is swift, but when you go to Flexifoils the image is grainy you get 403 errors and you have to wait for info to appear. Now you don't know who's paying your council what 'cos they don't have to declare it or if they do you don't make the choice 'cos of information overload. You're going to be pretty p'd off cos you can't see what you want to see and you've paid to see it.

 

Then if Bertie comes along and sets up his unilateral free server he then charge a premium for the extra vision. Therefore an additional tier to the market has happened, operating on the net is more expensive, and there you have both censorship and an inflationary impact all of which works to your and my detriment and not to the "Man's".

 

Now if that's getting the most of the net, so the few benefit over the many, and information is no longer free we are condeming ourselves to being bent over and done good and proper. Personally that's not a pleasant prospect....

[Mell1599968579]

I think thats more or less sort of what I thought.

 

Its not like a mysterious glass controller, its somebody who has invested heavily in the glass and if you want to see whats in the shop then the shopkeeper pays the glass people so that you can see. If they dont pay they dont get seen.

 

Is that wrong?

 

If the internet was a free, public funded service then yeh, it would be wrong but it isnt. Its a collection of systems paid for in the main by the business's that use it and if I have invested millions in my equipment why should it be wrong for me to levy a charge for some third parties data to be transmitted over my systems?

 

Why should I be obligated to give a 'stranger' a free ride in MY car that I have paid for, just because a group of people at my destination like to look at my unpaying passenger?

[The Geoff]

Net neutrality in its basic form is this:

 

"Every packet on the internet must be treated equally."

 

In very literal terms it means that any ISP, telecoms company, government or individually owned server should treat each packet the same. For example, China slows down international traffic by filtering it. This is still "net neutral", as long as they filter every packet the same way.

 

The fuss that's being made is over company X (let's say, hypothetically, Flexifoil) treating packets differently. Normally a packet, or an internet request (usually as simple as "connect me to bbc.co.uk") will be treated in the same way as any other, that's how the internet works, each packet wanders around asking if anyone knows anyone who is closer to the target. That's what makes it so robust, your request from the UK to France might be blocked for some reason, but UK -> USA -> France might be fine.

 

A breach of net neutrality would be Flexifoil's server/s detecting a request to New Zealand and intentionally refusing it or slowing it down, in this case because it might link to Peter Lynn, a competitor.

 

 

The "but I paid for 8Mb!" argument is technically a different issue, and whilst I used the example of Flexi (an individual company on one or a few servers), the whole thing really boils down to the backbones - that is, countries/governments and very large companies and telecoms.

[Middleend]

Cheers Geoff for grounding the discussion and clarifying the techy bits. That is exactly what Virgin are proposing to do with packets of information that passes through their servers. My analargies were **** anyway…

 

Currently that message has the same opportunity of being viewed or heard as the next message. Obviously it is not enough to just put that message out there, you have to work within the guidelines of the search engines, but it is possible to rise in the rankings of those engines for Free, because everyone has the ability to view that message.

 

OK if companies then are paying for faster message provision then the more they pay the more dominant their position, and also the less us as the “masses” need to be charged. This is great you may say, so more often than not you hook into the cheapest provider. But what you are hooked into then are the messages determined in a back room deal by a pair of suites rather than your free choice of messages. Because sure as eggs is eggs those packets of information once its OK to interfere with them can be blocked, decelerated as well as accelerated.

 

Personally I prefer to pay my dues and have the freedom to choose what I want to view, I enjoy the variety and opportunity that open access provides the small craftsmen and retailers that provide us with colour and non conformity, I like that I can explore what’s going on in the world from my desktop unhindered…..I may not always like what I see but I value that ability to have that vision unimpaired. At the end of the day if users are happy to be corralled towards a money magnet and have their choice of direction controlled then they will buy into, personally I say if it is allowed to start the flood gates will be opened and that will be the end of the last bastion of independent public thought and speech.

[eeyore]

now i'm deff signing up to virgen

 

[Middleend]

now i'm deff signing up to virgen

 

 

Hummmph ..... so much for my powers of persuasion... Enjoy

[Faceblast]

I’m with Be There and all websites working for me the same. All perfect and quick.

Downloading wise I can get up to 21Mb/s if server is good where I’m leeching from.

[Middleend]

Yup me too have been for years, and no issues with service or speed at the moment. It is the future that's at stake here and what they are planning to do that will have all the effects mentioned so far. So the idea is to show them that you're not happy about the direction they're taking by hitting them in the wallet and to show that their customers think its's unacceptible and a bad idea. Which is why I'm in the process of switching providers...have to admit that's a b...ache emails ect.

 

Anyway I've bolloxed on about this for too long.....flogging a dead donkey....no offence meant eeyore:p