Don't understand Net Neutrality? Details too boring for you? Watch this

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by MrScott

How many customers would pay Comcast $40/month to access a network of nothingness?
Without youtube and other sites the service Comcast provides is useless.

now reverse that. without the infrastructure youtube is also worthless.

[MrScott]

Agreed, that's why I pay Comcast for that infrastructure.

[MrScott]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

This is also not true.... it is a common myth but simply not true.

Is the chairman of Sprint in on the conspiracy?
America doesn't know how bad its Internet speed is: Sprint's Son

[slakjaw]

YouTube makes a TON of money off of us. Content they had no part in creating and have made no investment in. it is one hell of a business model. they get to pay for transit as well.

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

I have to believe you are joking here. Messing with me. No it is not the way the internet currently works. Cogent just got another peering agreement pulled. Once net neutrality passes nobody will be able to pull peering with that worthless company.

Have you even read what the net neutrality people want because You have no clue what you are talking about.

your ignorance is not an argument.

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

....All these companies have peering contracts with each other and contracts with each customer. NAPA could not slow down pelican no matter how much money they wanted to offer Comcast + the 5000 or 6000 other ISPs in the US.....

Kyle, you may be a super networking "hardware" guy, but if you don't think a networking/systems guy like myself could absolutely "play favorites" and degrade an "undesirable site's" performance (particularly if I were a technician at one of the "core carriers"), then you are simply incorrect. Now I "may" be a complete maroon since I don't agree with you, or maybe it's just possible that I have more knowledge and experience than you can imagine and am just looking at this from a different perspective .

ps: I absolutely guarantee you I could do it...easy peasy too

[gacook]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

This is also not true.... it is a common myth but simply not true.

Myth, you say?

The Cost of Connectivity 2013 | NewAmerica.org

The Fastest Web On Earth - In Photos: Countries With The Fastest Internet Speeds - Forbes

Global Broadband and Mobile Performance Data Compiled by Ookla | Net Index

Download Speed by Country | Net Index from Ookla

BBC News - Why is broadband more expensive in the US?

Read a little, slak; get educated.

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

What monopolies ??? You mean like Youtube? Yes YouTube is a monopoly so why are you on their side? there are like 6000 ISPs in the US. it is not a monopoly

youtube is not a monopoly in ANY sense.

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by MrScott

Is the chairman of Sprint in on the conspiracy?
America doesn't know how bad its Internet speed is: Sprint's Son

Masayoshi Son has an agenda. give Sprint T-Mobile and their spectrum and "we will fix Americas internet problems" Man its all a front I swear to god. Sprint used to be the company I thought would fix the broadband mess. Remember Sprints ION? it was the best thing of its day and was around way before anyone else. Now Sprint is a collection of people who have given up. Masayoshi is starting to realize he made a huge mistake.

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by KC911

Kyle, you may be a super networking "hardware" guy, but if you don't think a networking/systems guy like myself could absolutely "play favorites" and degrade an "undesirable site's" performance (particularly if I were a technician at one of the "core carriers"), then you are simply incorrect. Now I "may" be a complete maroon since I don't agree with you, or maybe it's just possible that I have more knowledge and experience than you can imagine and am just looking at this from a different perspective .

ps: I absolutely guarantee you I could do it...easy peasy too

I am sure you could. but you would get fired and the degraded service would get fixed. Does not seem worth it to me.

[MrScott]

slackjaw, you're conflating "backbone" (tier 1, etc.) providers (who have to worry about peering and transit) and last mile providers. I pay comcast (or TWC) to hook me into that backbone -- and that's all, they don't provide me any other service. What's available once I'm hooked up is none of their business. Net neutrality seeks to guarantee is stays none of their business.

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

your ignorance is not an argument.

Give some facts to support then.

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

youtube is not a monopoly in ANY sense.

Actually, yeah it is. in many senses... lol smh lol

YouTube's monopolistic behaviour is hurting indie music labels | Media | theguardian.com

The video site uses bullying tactics to force down royalty rates – and now it is attempting to do the same with audio streaming

Monopolies and YouTube - Dinnerblog

ouTube is basically a monopoly at this point.

Attention Mr. Almunia: How YouTube Uses Its Monopoly Power to Silence Critics | MUSIC

Attention Mr. Almunia: How YouTube Uses Its Monopoly Power to Silence Critics

[gacook]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

Give some facts to support then.

I did. Care to refute any of them?

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by gacook

Myth, you say?

The Cost of Connectivity 2013 | NewAmerica.org

The Fastest Web On Earth - In Photos: Countries With The Fastest Internet Speeds - Forbes

Global Broadband and Mobile Performance Data Compiled by Ookla | Net Index

Download Speed by Country | Net Index from Ookla

BBC News - Why is broadband more expensive in the US?

Read a little, slak; get educated.

Man, just because people here in the US don't want / need to pay for the fastest service available means we get bashed for stuff that is not true. there are a lot of people in the US who are fine with 896k DSL and there is nothing wrong with that.

Most of those countries who are at the top of that list Web Cam pr0n is there #1 export. of course it looks better when everyone has the highest speed available.

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

I am sure you could. but you would get fired and the degraded service would get fixed. Does not seem worth it to me.

So now you've changed your position that it CAN'T be done ? I'd also venture that I could also "cover my tracks" quite effectively if I "needed" to. As far as getting fired goes...I might just get promoted too...depends upon what the bo$$ wants .

ps: I'm just pickin' with ya a bit...but it might be worthwhile to consider where I'm coming from. If there is a potential for abuse and BIG $ to be made then "I" would like some safeguards in place to assure an "even" playing field as the Internet continues to develop and evolve....YMMV.

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

Actually, yeah it is. in many senses... lol smh lol

YouTube's monopolistic behaviour is hurting indie music labels | Media | theguardian.com

The video site uses bullying tactics to force down royalty rates – and now it is attempting to do the same with audio streaming

Monopolies and YouTube - Dinnerblog

ouTube is basically a monopoly at this point.

Attention Mr. Almunia: How YouTube Uses Its Monopoly Power to Silence Critics | MUSIC

Attention Mr. Almunia: How YouTube Uses Its Monopoly Power to Silence Critics

youtube isn't even close to a monopoly. by your definition of a monopoly, walmart is one.

the real definition of a monoploy is is a company with no competition. as such, youtube has a lot of competition in terms of video hosting and sharing websites. vimeo, daily motion, flickr, metacafe, even the likes of photobucket and facebook have similar product and compete directly with youtube. hell even itunes. most of these websites are actually far better than youtube.

[slakjaw]

I get it man... And I could go upstairs right now and take a cisco CRS system and deliver it to you but there is a reason nobody does that kind of stuff. For enough money to live out my days in rio I might but it still ain't worth it

[MrScott]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

Man, just because people here in the US don't want / need to pay for the fastest service available means we get bashed for stuff that is not true.

It's not just faster service it's faster service for less $$! It's crazy to suggest anyone wouldn't want that. And before you argue "the US is a big country, population density, etc" look at Sweden, lower population density and faster/cheaper service. In NYC with a ridiculously high population density my service was still relatively poor and expensive.

[gacook]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

Man, just because people here in the US don't want / need to pay for the fastest service available means we get bashed for stuff that is not true. there are a lot of people in the US who are fine with 896k DSL and there is nothing wrong with that.

Most of those countries who are at the top of that list Web Cam pr0n is there #1 export. of course it looks better when everyone has the highest speed available.

Yup, South Korea and Japan are known as the largest pr0n providers out there...

What stuff are we getting bashed for that isn't true? Consumer internet rates are higher here than most other "civilized" places, and we have some of the worst service. That is fact--not myth, not bashed for something that isn't true--fact.