Will the internet evolved into a media form similar to cable and radio

[Benzoate]

If net neutrality isn't enforced, and businesses are allowed to manipulate the pipes of the internet possibly allowing only a small number of websites who can afford the fee faster transmission, do you predict that The Internet will just be another version of cable or satelitte tv , where , just like cable tv now , all the websites will start to look the same and provide the same kind of information .

Or should the government control the pipes of the internet , allowing equal access to all websites as it is now, possibly reducing new innovation in technology that will be added to an evolving internet.

My personal opinion is , I don't not want open access to the internet because I know instantly the big businesses will have advantage over everybody, and the little guy's blog will be overshadow. I don't want our government to regulate the transmission pipes because it isn't there's to control.

Don't know about anybody else, but I'm very happy with the way the internet is now and phone companies who provide internet access to their customers should change the way the infrastructure of the internet only if most of their customers want change.

 

[Evo]

If net neutrality isn't enforced, and businesses are allowed to manipulate the pipes of the internet possibly allowing only a small number of websites who can afford the fee faster transmission, do you predict that The Internet will just be another version of cable or satelitte tv , where , just like cable tv now , all the websites will start to look the same and provide the same kind of information .

Net neutrality is somewhat of a conspiracy theory. From the beginning, those that could afford more bandwidth had faster websites. Some carriers have been offering for an extra fee, "premium" services which will put your website on a faster connection and provide better SLA's. This is normal in the world of telecom. This does NOT interfere in any way with regular websites on the internet. That's bogus fear mongering.

Or should the government control the pipes of the internet , allowing equal access to all websites as it is now, possibly reducing new innovation in technology that will be added to an evolving internet.

The US Goverernment developed and owned the internet "Arpanet" in the beginning along with carriers like AT&T's Bell Labs.

My personal opinion is , I don't not want open access to the internet because I know instantly the big businesses will have advantage over everybody, and the little guy's blog will be overshadow.

Uhm, that's currently what the internet is, it is owned by private "Big Business". What do you think the internet is?

Don't know about anybody else, but I'm very happy with the way the internet is now.

Ok, that means you like the way that BIG BUSINESS owns and charges for internet access.

 

[Benzoate]

The Internet isn't owned by Big Businesses , just like the big businesses don't owned our highways. We as the Broadband, cable, and dial up consumers should have a say in what websites we access, not the phone companies .Just like any business, small or big, should not put a tollbooth on every highway in order to access an entryway. only tollbooth should exists only if to maintained the infrastructure of the roads , not to build super information highways not everybody could access it. Just like are access to websites should not be block just to because a few can afford the fee for faster transmission. There have been some isolated lawsuits where phone companies blocked customers from their accessing the websites of their competitors. These kinds of incidents tell us that the phone companies have the power to block of any access to a website they may find offensive , because they want to think about their images. Looked at all the cable tv shows and radio shows that are snatched off the air by media companies because they may offend the religious yahoos and the PC police. Do you really want the same fate to happen on the internet. And what about the websites who will not be able to afford the fee to have their internet subscriber's pipes connected to their website?

I'm aware that Arpanet existed for military and scientific research purposes way before the Internet became commercialize. I wouldn't want the internet to regulate or manipulate the information that flows from website to website, I just want them to maintain the open access to all policy that has existed for nearly thirty years.

I know that Internet is growing and that the bandwidth needs to be expanded in order to compensate for the growing population of internet users. But I cannot pay for the extra bandwidth if at the same time , I sacrificed the fundamental principles of , such the un-official open access for all policy

 

[Evo]

The Internet isn't owned by Big Businesses ,

I'm afraid you're wrong. I work for one of the BIG BUSINESSES that comprises part of the internet, some of the Big Businesses are the larger telephone companies. The internet is a "patchwork" of networks owned by a few big companies that resell access to smaller providers that in turn sell to end users like you. I sell access to the internet backbone to smaller telephone companies and ISP's.

But I cannot pay for the extra bandwidth if at the same time , I sacrificed the fundamental principles of , such the un-official open access for all policy

I don't know what you've been reading, but you don't have to buy anything different from what you have now. You've been misinformed.

 

[Benzoate]

I'm afraid you're wrong. I work for one of the BIG BUSINESSES that comprises part of the internet, some of the Big Businesses are the larger telephone companies. The internet is a "patchwork" of networks owned by a few big companies that resell access to smaller providers that in turn sell to end users like you. I sell access to the internet backbone to smaller telephone companies and ISP's.

Government , military, and college websites comprises a large part of the internet as well as commercial websites and businesses don't control what flows throw the former. Big businesses cannot owned those websites , if the Internet initially spawned from from military and government websites.
don't know what you've been reading, but you don't have to buy anything different from what you have now. You've been misinformed.[/QUOTE]here's where I got my information on net neutrality:

PBS NOW part 1/2
PBS NOW part 2/2

 

[Evo]

Government , military, and college websites comprises a large part of the internet as well as commercial websites and businesses don't control what flows throw the former. Big businesses cannot owned those websites , if the Internet initially spawned from from military and government websites.

The internet is not websites. You have a very confused understanding of the internet, service providers and websites.

Anyone can put up a website as long as they have a server (computer) to host it on with access to the internet. But that's not the internet.

An ISP has the right to block content they disprove of, just like this forum has the right to block content we disprove of.

The links you provided are talking about what I just said, better service is availbale at a higher cost . DUH REALLY? You mean if I pay more I can get a better connection? WOW.

Of course bigger companies can afford better connections. Of course a small start up can't afford premium services. BUT IT DOES NOT CHANGE WHAT YOU SEE NOW. Access to "small company" will be the same as it is now. The only difference is that MSNBC can buy better connections. That's life. Grow up. That's the way commerce is.

So you're buying into the whining of small start ups saying "if I can't afford a fast connection, no one should be allowed to have a fast connection". So let's bring the entire internet down to the lowest crappy service level that every business can afford even if it is only in the interest of the small business and not the consumer.

 

[Benzoate]

The internet is not websites. You have a very confused understanding of the internet, service providers and websites.

Anyone can put up a website as long as they have a server (computer) to host it on with access to the internet. But that's not the internet.

An ISP has the right to block content they disprove of, just like this forum has the right to block content wedisprove of.

Websites makeup the Internet, t they are part of the internet, just like five fingers are part of the internet body.

You are correct though. ISP are owned by businesses . But if my Internet service provider did decide to blocked access to certain websites, then I will have no choice but to create my own ISP where I control what websites and web browsers I can access. Just Because phone companies has the upper clout , doesn't mean I can only access the internet through their internet service. Its becoming easier for anybody and not just phone companies to create their own ISP. So if any phone company starts charging websites to have transmission to their consumers, I will and I'm sure millions of other customers will give up their internet service to create their own ISP.

 

[Evo]

But if my Internet service provider did decide to blocked access to certain websites, then I will have no choice but to create my own ISP where I control what websites and web browsers I can access. Just Because phone companies has the upper clout , doesn't mean I can only access the internet through their internet service. Its becoming easier for anybody and not just phone companies to create their own ISP. So if any phone company starts charging websites to have transmission to their consumers, I will and I'm sure millions of other customers will give up their internet service to create their own ISP.

Uhm, no. You have no idea what it takes to become an ISP or the cost. OY Vey! Go take some courses on communications and then come back in a year when you have some inkling of what you're talking about.

Websites are only a small part of internet traffic, most internet traffic is business to business and is not accessible by the public.

 

[Benzoate]

Uhm, no. You have no idea what it takes to become an ISP or the cost. OY Vey! Go take some courses on communications and then come back in a year when you have some inkling of what you're talking about.

Websites are only a small part of internet traffic, most internet traffic is business to business and is not accessible by the public.

I never said that creating an ISP would be easy. I probably would need to put an investment in for an ISP and further educate myself on how ISP's are developed and how ISPs connect to the Internet. But their have been some people who are not affiliated with any phone companies who developed their own ISP addresss.

The only sufficient reason for creating a self-made ISP would be when the ISP service provider decided to block/slowdown access to websites that didn't pay their extra fee .

No one owns those pipes. not the Government. Not a few elite corporations. Its free for all. Free in the sense , that anyone , with sufficient funds can access those pipes.

 

[Evo]

I never said that creating an ISP would be easy. I probably would need to put an investment in for an ISP and further educate myself on how ISP's are developed and how ISPs connect to the Internet. But their have been some people who are not affiliated with any phone companies who developed their own ISP addresss.

No, you cannot create your own IP addresses. You will be assigned addresses from the carrier (big business) you buy your internet access from. ARIN controls IP addresses.

The only sufficient reason for creating a self-made ISP would be when the ISP service provider decided to block/slowdown access to websites that didn't pay their extra fee .

That's a fallicy, the website owner pays for better service, you, the consumer benefit if you choose to go to their site.

No one owns those pipes not the Government. Not a few elite corporations. Its free for all. Free in the sense , that anyone , with sufficient funds can access those pipes.

NO! The "pipes" as you call them , what we in the industry refer to as "backbone" ARE owned by the BIG CORPORATIONS that form the internet.

There is no free for all, it's ALL owned by businesses. There are no "pipes" that aren't owned, that's either a bad joke told by someone or a serious lack of understanding.

 

[Benzoate]

No, you cannot create your own IP addresses. You will be assigned addresses from the carrier (big business) you buy your internet access from. ARIN controls IP addresses.

That's a fallicy, the website owner pays for better service, you, the consumer benefit if you choose to go to their site.

NO! The "pipes" as you call them , what we in the industry refer to as "backbone" ARE owned by the BIG CORPORATIONS that form the internet.

There is no free for all, it's ALL owned by businesses. There are no "pipes" that aren't owned, that's either a bad joke or abject stupidity. You and the small businesses and the reporters don't know how things work. The end.

Alltel, AT &T and EarthBig and other phone companies did NOT have a hand in forming the Internet. phone companies did not create the World Wide Web, HTML , HTTP, the webrowser, individuals like Time Berners Lee and Robert Cailliau did. Scientists and engineers at universities did. Phone only allow information to flow faster from point a to point b. Throughout the early 90's , the Internet was mainly made up of public computer networks , webpages being derived from mainly academic, military , and technical settings.

I'm sorry to say this, but its seems like you are giving all the credit to the phone companies , when they really had not hand in developing any of those things I listed. Just because the phone companies helped the internet grow tremudously in the past decade doesn't mean they have absolute final say in any decision concerning the fate of the internet or who gets to own an ISP.
Can you show me proof that you cannot acces websites without the help of the BIG CORPORations. According to the Wikipedia webpage on ISP , I can create My own ISP , with knowledge on ISP's and money to financed the ISP independent of phone companies, big or small.

 

[Benzoate]

That's a fallicy, the website owner pays for better service, you, the consumer benefit if you choose to go to their site.

exactly how "better" does internet service get? I already have DSL Broadband connection. For the most part , I have no probably with my current service. So why would i need a "faster" service? and don't say better video quality , because if I wanted better video quality , I buy a good video processor. Tell me what is so "better" about a service that allows faster access to a website that has to pay for its service fee, yet in the process another website who doesn't pay the fee won't be accessed by me?'

I rather my internet provider just offer me a standard or premium package and not just a premuim package.

standard internet service could be the existing internet service now.
premium internet service could be the internet service in which subscribers with websites have to pay the fee in order for their website to be accessed by multple people

 

[Evo]

Alltel, AT &T and EarthBig and other phone companies did NOT have a hand in forming the Internet. phone companies did not create the World Wide Web, HTML , HTTP, the webrowser, individuals like Time Berners Lee and Robert Cailliau did. Scientists and engineers at universities did. Phone only allow information to flow faster from point a to point b. Throughout the early 90's , the Internet was mainly made up of public computer networks , webpages being derived from mainly academic, military , and technical settings.

The internet existed before Tim Berners Lee developed www addressing, before there were search engines, etc... these were all later "add ons" that made the internet easier for the general public to use.

AT&T was responsible for administering the Internic database for one thing (I worked for AT&T then)

INTERNIC INFORMATION SERVICES
-----------------------------

This month the InterNIC begins regular entries to the Internet
Monthly Report. The InterNIC is a cooperative project of three
organizations, General Atomics/CERFnet, AT&T, and Network
Solutions, Inc. (NSI), designed to provide network information
services to the networking community. General Atomics/CERFnet
provides Information Services; AT&T provides Directory and Database Services; and NSI provides Registration Services.

http://www.iana.org/periodic-reports/imr-jul93.txt

I'm sorry to say this, but its seems like you are giving all the credit to the phone companies , when they really had not hand in developing any of those things I listed.

They own most of the internet backbone, other data companies contribute a smaller portion of the internet. Without the internet, addressing, search engines etc... would be useless because there would be no internet.

Just because the phone companies helped the internet grow tremudously in the past decade doesn't mean they have absolute final say in any decision concerning the fate of the internet or who gets to own an ISP.

You don't understand what an ISP is. An ISP (other than if the backbone provider acts as an ISP) is just a person or group of people that lease connectivity to the internet from a backbone provider for resale to customers. Sometimes they are so small that they can't even afford to lease the connection directly from a backbone provider and instead lease the service from a reseller, and then resell the resold service. And when I say "sell", that's misleading because they are actually just allowing the person access to the network for a contracted period of time, the person/ISP does not own the service, they pay a monthly fee to be connected.

Can you show me proof that you cannot acces websites without the help of the BIG CORPORations. According to the Wikipedia webpage on ISP , I can create My own ISP , with knowledge on ISP's and money to financed the ISP independent of phone companies, big or small.

Read my answers above. Unless you have access to magic, you will need access to a backbone provider, most individuals sign up with small ISP's that resell resold access, but ultimately, the access came from a backbone provider and these are big businesses.

 

[chroot]

Creating your own ISP doesn't mean you enter into competition with the Big Companies -- it means you become a direct customer of those Big Companies. The Big Companies own the backbone: the equipment, the fiber optic cables, the land leases, etc.

The only option you have to compete directly with the Big Companies is to create your own backbone (at a cost of trillions of dollars), at which time you will become a Big Company yourself.

You seem to have this idea that the internet is composed of a patchwork of thousands of tiny networks of roughly equal size. This is not true, and would not work well at all. The internet is like your body's circulatory system, or the highway system in your country. Capillaries connect to small vessels, which connect to larger and larger vessels which aggregrate larger and larger flows. Without these high-end "arteries" carrying enormous quantities of information from continent to continent, the internet would be uselessly slow.

- Warren

 

[Smurf]

so.. you're saying the internet is like a bunch of small tubes?

 

[Benzoate]

The internet existed before Tim Berners Lee developed www addressing, before there were search engines, etc... these were all later "add ons" that made the internet easier for the general public to use.

AT&T was responsible for administering the Internic database for one thing (I worked for AT&T then)

http://www.iana.org/periodic-reports/imr-jul93.txt

They own most of the internet backbone, other data companies contribute a smaller portion of the internet. Without the internet, addressing, search engines etc... would be useless because there would be no internet.

You don't understand what an ISP is. An ISP (other than if the backbone provider acts as an ISP) is just a person or group of people that lease connectivity to the internet from a backbone provider for resale to customers. Sometimes they are so small that they can't even afford to lease the connection directly from a backbone provider and instead lease the service from a reseller, and then resell the resold service. And when I say "sell", that's misleading because they are actually just allowing the person access to the network for a contracted period of time, the person/ISP does not own the service, they pay a monthly fee to be connected.

Read my answers above. Unless you have access to magic, you will need access to a backbone provider, most individuals sign up with small ISP's that resell resold access, but ultimately, the access came from a backbone provider and these are big businesses.

Okay, but how did the US government create access to the internet before phone companies made internet access available to the consumer?

yet, these same phone companies who wouldn't want the FCC to regulate how phone companies provide internet access to their companies , want the FCC to regulate P2P filesharing and block file sharing off completely. They seem to forget that P2P filesharing is used for a variety of reasons than just piracy.

 

[Evo]

Okay, but how did the US government create access to the internet before phone companies made internet access available to the consumer?

It was probably over AT&T since they were the only company at the time with the ability. You do realize that the governent leases their networks from the telephone companies?

 

[jammieg]

It reminds me of the library of Alexadria, for it's time the greatest source of knowledge and discovery on Earth eventually the mob came and burned it down and killed the last scholar there why would they destroy such a valiable thing?, it would be like destroying the internet today, probably won't happen all at once though.

 

[Evo]

It reminds me of the library of Alexadria, for it's time the greatest source of knowledge and discovery on Earth eventually the mob came and burned it down and killed the last scholar there why would they destroy such a valiable thing?, it would be like destroying the internet today, probably won't happen all at once though.

What? Can you state that in a way that has some meaning?

 

[DaveC426913]

It reminds me of the library of Alexadria, for it's time the greatest source of knowledge and discovery on Earth eventually the mob came and burned it down and killed the last scholar there why would they destroy such a valiable thing?, it would be like destroying the internet today

No, it would be more like destroying Microsoft* today. The library of Alexandria did not represent everyone, just as MS doesn't.

*And there are a lot of people that would not rue this.

 

[Art]

Net neutrality means different things to different people but a generally accepted definition is the one put forward by Cardozo Law School professor Susan Crawford: "insists that a neutral Internet must forward packets on a first-come, first served basis" Which translates to one person's upgrade shouldn't mean another customer suffers a downgrade.

This concept is not new. In 1860, a US federal law subsidizing a coast-to-coast telegraph line stated that
“...messages received from any individual, company, or corporation, or from any telegraph lines connecting with this line at either of its termini, shall be impartially transmitted in the order of their reception, excepting that the dispatches of the government shall have priority.”

And so whilst I doubt many would disagree that there should be incentives to upgrade and improve the backbone of the internet it is important that the process by which this is done doesn't haven't a negative effect on the average consumer.

 

[Evo]

There will never be equality because someone that buys a cheap internet connection from an ISP that doesn't use the best Tier one carrier will never get their packets delivered as quickly as someone paying more with a better carrier. This is due to how the internet has to work. Whether or not your ISP has private peering that goes through without queing up at at public peering point will affect how fast a website downloads. Also, the amount of bandwidth will affect the speed. If the end user is on the same ISP as the website they are viewing they will download quicker because there is no peering. If the website caches static content at the network edge nearest the end user, their page will download faster.

Net neutrality was made up by people that don't understand how the internet works.

 

[Art]

I don't think anyone is suggesting there should be net equality but that's completely different to net neutrality. The quote I provided re the 1860 telegraph law sums up the concept of net neutrality and is applicable irrelevant of the advantages one gains from greater broadband speeds or superior equipment. It simply means that companies shouldn't be allowed to jump the queue by paying extra i.e. data packets from one customer should not be deliberately delayed to make space for a 'premium' customer which is what I believe some ISPs are suggesting they would like to do.

Another issue which is most often included in the heading of net neutrality is the refusal by some telecom companies to carry certain traffic. As an example VoIP traffic is under attack simply because it is in competition with the telecom company's own landline service. IMO This seems like a very undesirable development both in terms of competition and technological development.

And while I'm having a moan about ISP's another thing that irritates me is how they advertise broadband connection speeds as up to X MB/s whereas the reality is you would have to live in the telephone exchange to actually achieve the advertised rate and then there's the issue of 'contention' where in effect they sell the same connection to 50 or more people who then have to share the connection between them.