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

[gacook]

I already answered you, Slak. Work on your reading comprehension skills.

[flipper35]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

Google gets their back-haul from Sprint and Verizon. They have nothing but last mile they cannot cut anyone out.

Man so since I pay for phone service I should be able to call any other phone for free because hey man I pay for mine so they should not have to. this is actually what you boys believe. whatever.

You didn't answer my question so I will ask again...

Tell me why those that own infrastructure should be forced to support those without infrastructure under all circumstances no matter what even if it means they go bankrupt. Go ahead and explain that to everyone here on this site. Please just answer the question.

You are talking end user to end user here. A good analog would be Facetime or Skype. You paid for your phone service and the person you are calling paid for their service. What you are endorsing would allow Apple to pay more than Skype so the Skype service would suck making people prefer Facetime. Or for your phone you may get weather updates from your local station and weather.com but your local weather sms doesn't arrive for a day because weather.com is paying for a fast lane.

[slakjaw]

OK. No that's not net neutrality. You have a really bad misunderstanding of what the net neutrality people want. It has little to do with the actual content. What it is, is saying Dear AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint - you now have to peer with Cogent and allow them to dump as much traffic into your network as they want. and there is nothing you can do about it.

They make no money from peering. it is supposed to be a near 50/50 exchange but with some of the smaller companies it it lopsided. When it is lopsided they start to charge the smaller company which they should. If Net Neutrality passes they wont be able to charge them anymore.

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by gacook

I already answered you, Slak. Work on your reading comprehension skills.

No you didn't. it is a simple question. why not just tell us?

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by flipper35

You are talking end user to end user here. A good analog would be Facetime or Skype. You paid for your phone service and the person you are calling paid for their service. What you are endorsing would allow Apple to pay more than Skype so the Skype service would suck making people prefer Facetime. Or for your phone you may get weather updates from your local station and weather.com but your local weather sms doesn't arrive for a day because weather.com is paying for a fast lane.

Sigh..... I explained a few pages ago. that will never happen. There will never be any intentional slowing down of anything. If you believe there will or already is. Watch out for the black helicopters, they are watching you.

[gacook]

Yup, would never happen.

This hilarious graph of Netflix speeds shows the importance of net neutrality

[slakjaw]

The graph shows a period of time that cogent got peering agreements pulled one after another and refued to pay. That pretty much all it shows.

[gacook]

The only thing worse than ignorance is willful ignorance.

[slakjaw]

Ya know, Clintoon screwed the industry back in the 90s. He said there wasn't enough competition and local telcos had to allow small outfits like MacLeoud into the CO's - if they didn't have the floor space they were required to expand their buildings, upgrade power plants, whatever it took. Telcos spent billions to accommodate them. And today they are all gone. Maybe if that money had been spent elsewhere you guys would have your cheap fast internet.

And now you want to do it again.

History is not on your side but you don't care.

I think you guys are happier when you are miserable.

[gacook]

And I think you still don't understand what's trying to be accoplished here. By the big, poor, vulnerable companies.

[WolfeMacleod]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

is English your first language? You are saying Netflix should not have to pay for their connection. You just said that a few posts ago.

.

Sorry, Slak, but Netflix does pay for their connection. They pay their pipeline, and I pay mine to get that content. THEY should not have to pay MY pipeline because I want that content. I PAY FOR IT.
You mentioned earlier about Netflix installing servers at various locations. Fine, they pay for that, cool. Why do they do that? To relieve their own direct pipeline and customer pipelines from the burden, and for being able to deliver content better.

That's not what Net Neutrality is about, either.

Nokia still exists? Now that's a dumb company if I ever saw one.

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by gacook

And I think you still don't understand what's trying to be accoplished here. By the big, poor, vulnerable companies.

You think its about TV shows.

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by WolfeMacleod

Sorry, Slak, but Netflix does pay for their connection. They pay their pipeline, and I pay mine to get that content. THEY should not have to pay MY pipeline because I want that content. I PAY FOR IT.
You mentioned earlier about Netflix installing servers at various locations. Fine, they pay for that, cool. Why do they do that? To relieve their own direct pipeline and customer pipelines from the burden, and for being able to deliver content better.

That's not what Net Neutrality is about, either.

Nokia still exists? Now that's a dumb company if I ever saw one.

Thank you for the personal attack. Who do you work for? I said YouTube not Netflix. Netflix uses Cogent which is why that graph looked like it did. And they should still have to pay for a connection.

[gacook]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

You think its about TV shows.

Um...no. Try again.

Seriously, do some research. Or continue making yourself look like a fool; your choice.

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

Ya know, Clintoon screwed the industry back in the 90s. He said there wasn't enough competition and local telcos had to allow small outfits like MacLeoud into the CO's - if they didn't have the floor space they were required to expand their buildings, upgrade power plants, whatever it took. Telcos spent billions to accommodate them. And today they are all gone. Maybe if that money had been spent elsewhere you guys would have your cheap fast internet.

And now you want to do it again.

History is not on your side but you don't care.

I think you guys are happier when you are miserable.

History is already not on your side. Why do you guys ignore your own mistakes?

[WolfeMacleod]

Oh.. and as far as other countries connectivity and speed go....Norway...

ADSL became available to private consumers around late 2000. Depending on the provider, offered speeds range from 512/128 kbit/s to as high as 8/1 Mbit/s for ADSL, while ADSL2+ is slowly becoming available with speeds reaching up to 24/1.5 Mbit/s.

Fiber is also almost in every city in Norway now speeds ranging from 2/2 Mbit/s up to 1000/1000 Mbit/s (the fastest available consumer line, only available in Drammen). Prices vary constantly due to fierce competition between providers, but prices can be found as low as 195 NOK (US$30) per month for the most basic ADSL connections, while ADSL2+ is somewhat higher, starting around 499,-(NextGenTel) NOK (US$82) per month. This is in addition to DSL equipment rental and installation fees.

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by gacook

Um...no. Try again.

Seriously, do some research. Or continue making yourself look like a fool; your choice.

But I am right. You are wrong here not me.

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by WolfeMacleod

Oh.. and as far as other countries connectivity and speed go....Norway...

ADSL became available to private consumers around late 2000. Depending on the provider, offered speeds range from 512/128 kbit/s to as high as 8/1 Mbit/s for ADSL, while ADSL2+ is slowly becoming available with speeds reaching up to 24/1.5 Mbit/s.

Fiber is also almost in every city in Norway now speeds ranging from 2/2 Mbit/s up to 1000/1000 Mbit/s (the fastest available consumer line, only available in Drammen). Prices vary constantly due to fierce competition between providers, but prices can be found as low as 195 NOK (US$30) per month for the most basic ADSL connections, while ADSL2+ is somewhat higher, starting around 499,-(NextGenTel) NOK (US$82) per month. This is in addition to DSL equipment rental and installation fees.

Man! Imagine if Clintoon hadnt made his stupid Telephone Neutrality law back in the 90s!!!!

[gacook]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

But I am right. You are wrong here not me.

Interesting how I've supplied multiple sources supporting what EVERYONE else here is stating, and you've supplied..."I'm right; you're wrong" as your evidence.

[slakjaw]

You have supplied nothing of value to this thread.