Verizon, Google Announce Net Neutrality Proposal

Status
Not open for further replies.

Darkerson

Distinguished
Oct 28, 2009
231
0
18,830
0
While Im glad they are willing to compromise on the wired networks, what they have planed for the wireless networks has me a little worried...
 

hunter315

Distinguished
Moderator
May 12, 2009
81
0
18,590
1
How are they figuring wireless is too much different from wired. The internet is the internet, it shouldnt matter if i get it through DSL, fiber optics, or radio waves, i still want all my stuff to get treated equally.
 

Azimuth01

Distinguished
Mar 14, 2009
31
0
18,580
0
sounds like Google wants to develop it's own competitive nationwide wireless network...but...before this can happen they want to make sure they maintain absolute control over their new project for the foreseeable future...just my $0.02
 

haunted one

Distinguished
Aug 21, 2009
73
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]pocketdrummer[/nom]Let the boycott begin. What's Microsoft's stance on Net-Neutrality? If they're for it, I might be switching over to bing.[/citation]

There are so few techies, compared to normal Google Search users, that any boycott by the technical community will have negligible impact. Something else will have to be done if Google doesn't compromise.
 

Ramar

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2009
127
0
18,630
0
Every day another End Of The World news story happens about something. Food, gas, net, whatever it may be, and does it ever happen?

Obviously not.

So Verizon and Google want the ability to control their phone's traffic. Have they said how? No, all they said was that they want the option to if need be, and if it [doesn't hurt the consumer].

"In addition, the Government Accountability Office would be required to report to Congress annually on developments in the wireless broadband marketplace, and whether or not current policies are working to protect consumers."
 

toxxel

Distinguished
Apr 14, 2009
13
0
18,560
0
Additional, differentiated online services. So what I got out of this is they want to charge extra for services you could already get over normal service. I don't quite understand the gaming options, something like you get 250ms ping pay 5 extra you can get 50ms latency? My opinion on the gaming side is don't mess with it, since it's not broken. But I can understand the entertainment side, possibly offering movie premiers in your living room would be nice.
 

therabiddeer

Distinguished
Apr 19, 2008
137
0
18,630
0
What is the difference between a wireless network and a wired network that it would constitute different rules? Is it not using the internet still? Isnt wireless supposed to be the future? If wireless is the future, and we dont have the same neutrality laws in place for the future then what is the point of having neutrality in place for today?
 

therabiddeer

Distinguished
Apr 19, 2008
137
0
18,630
0
What is the difference between a wireless network and a wired network that it would constitute different rules? Is it not using the internet still? Isnt wireless supposed to be the future? If wireless is the future, and we dont have the same neutrality laws in place for the future then what is the point of having neutrality in place for today?
 

Dirtman73

Distinguished
Sep 11, 2009
186
0
18,630
0
I can't believe it took Tom's this long to finally post a story on this controversy. It's almost like they're having a hard time imagining Google being involved in something this shady.

All of you Google fanboiz need to wake up and smell the greedy. They don't care about you. They care about maximizing profit. That's it.
 

K-zon

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2010
179
0
18,630
0
Well, given going from dial-up to DSL takes a router, Now going from one wireless service to another is probably the samething. Wireless does give to more of an area of expansion or use unless developed otherwise. Even with cable , there would be difference means and use, cause if you can get internet over cable, and have the phone line bring in internet, it gets to which service are you going to pay for? Where and why are you going to either one? What would wireless be good for? Should you use wireless or wire?

Know wireless has its issues with gaming, but responses to everything else is good. Things have changed though giving closeness of wireless "things" and uses of them, controllers, cameras, phones to some sense, whatever else. Whereever there proposal goes, and what issues its suppose to fix, hopefully it maintains or balances some of the price fixing. And services used with it.
 

therabiddeer

Distinguished
Apr 19, 2008
137
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]Dirtman73[/nom]I can't believe it took Tom's this long to finally post a story on this controversy. It's almost like they're having a hard time imagining Google being involved in something this shady.All of you Google fanboiz need to wake up and smell the greedy. They don't care about you. They care about maximizing profit. That's it.[/citation]
There have been lots of stories about it but none of them have proper sources. Hell, the NYTimes published an article that was entirely untrue. I approve of Tom's making sure the facts are right before making an article.
 

razorblaze42

Distinguished
Jun 2, 2009
42
0
18,580
0
It’s just an agreement between Google and Verizon, while they have powerful lobbyist... the agreement isn't the law, so not much to worry about at this point. It does however show Google and Verizon to be "shady characters" and yes I probably will close my Google account and move to Bing...since I already hate Yahoo. Verizon sucks so that a no brainer.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Google is smart enough to realize that full spectrum wireless broadband is the wave of the future. The FCC currently places absurd limitations on what frequencies wireless devices can operate at, all in the name of safety and "unforseen consequences". Basically they dont want some new 100mbps cell phone to fry someones head off because the manufacturers didnt understand the technology. It's almost akin to disallowing cell phones on airplanes. It's all for "just in case".

But advances in technology will force the FCC to re-evaluate health risks, and new frequencies will be unlocked bit by bit. There is so much available bandwidth in the air that we havent even tapped into yet it's ridiculous. One day we'll all be communicating via camera in 1080p like in star trek. Google knows this, they're smart. They are counting on foolish citizens to be too nearsighted to predict the future at length like they can. They are counting on your naivety, thinking "welp wireless sure is slow today, I can only get 54mbps, I'd much rather have a land line because windows says I get 100mbps". They are sitting there acting all innocent like all they want to control is some worthless 3rd rate wireless broadband that's only mildly useful for making a few phone calls and nothing else.

WRONG. Once the world goes wireless they will have already established themselves as the gatekeepers 15 years prior and nobody will even think twice about it, everyone will just assume "thats always the way it's been". We are writing history right now folks, dont let Google think you're too dumb to know it.
 

f-14

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2010
774
0
18,940
4
hmmm nobody picked up on the amendment of the Universal Service Fund ( the tax they want to modify) so they can use said funds to build their wireless network with at the expense of every internet/telephone/cable provider.
either the FCC can take this idea and make the rules also enforceable to wireless, or they can allow wireless jammers XD or we can charge outragouesly to each wireless provider for access for their traffic on our wifi hot spots. this last type of behaviour is something already done with electric companies are required to buy excess electricity you produce, if you have a self power generation method (solar/wind/hydroelectric generation)

might as well expound upon that principle if you have extra wireless broadband not being used!

"put away our 'Jump to Conclusions' mats"
nice reference use Jane, wish more people used it still.
 

wiyosaya

Distinguished
Apr 12, 2006
396
0
18,930
0
A cap of $2 million in fines is pretty trivial for big companies like this. Personally, I say that no cap on the fine would be appropriate - especially at the scale that these companies deal with.

Also, I must agree that the wireless clause is a double standard. I could see this clause applying if, say, data rates were severely limited over that of wire lines; however, IMHO, current wireless data rates support equally as-large-as-wired-lines data transfers. As long as data transfers by one or a few entities out of the many do not saturate wireless transfers to the exclusion of a disproportionately large number of other users, then I see no need for a special rules-do-not-apply-here clause for wireless data.

Perhaps this is their concern - that the wireless pipe is not as large as the wired pipe and as such, the wireless pipe could saturate more easily than the wired pipe.

Then again, the wireless pipe is a "feature" that they can charge more for (like a voice mail provider charging you double for 50% more message storage space), and it seems to me that such a "feature" is undoubtedly one that has $$$$ in their eyes. Simple greed is perhaps the easiest explanation for their rules do not apply here statement regarding wireless access.
 

tokenz

Distinguished
Mar 11, 2006
206
0
18,830
0
Thats fine google I will just go without a smart phone. You dont have enough market penetration that people absolutly need smartphones. I know I will give mine up. Garmin will be happy I will buy a standalone gps now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M Streaming Video & TVs 1
F Streaming Video & TVs 2
S Streaming Video & TVs 3
P Streaming Video & TVs 1
manolain Streaming Video & TVs 6
G Streaming Video & TVs 1
Z Streaming Video & TVs 1
rutherfordsc Streaming Video & TVs 3
K Streaming Video & TVs 3
Marshall Honorof Streaming Video & TVs 14
S Streaming Video & TVs 1
G Streaming Video & TVs 10
A Streaming Video & TVs 5
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 3
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 1
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 6
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 8
G Streaming Video & TVs 8
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 47
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 10

ASK THE COMMUNITY