Net Neutrality 8-7-2006

Filed Under Business Life, Community, SOB Business, Successful Blog, Trends | Leave a Comment

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

Online Advocacy: Same As It Ever Was?

The net neutrality fight has many parallels to anti-Communications Decency Act battle that raged beginning in 1995. Online activists were emboldened by free-speech issues and teamed with established companies to fight the legislation. The activists lost the fight in Congress and with President Clinton who signed the bill, but generated enough momentum and support that they rallied considerable resources to their side to win in the Supreme Court, which struck down the law.

The activists…

  • Got sites like Yahoo! to go black for a day (Black Thursday)
  • Organized online petitions that got more than 100,000 signatures
  • Drove direct constituent communications to members of Congress

    • If we can learn from recent history, the CDA battle taught us that the Web can quickly bring people together to marshal forces for a common cause, but that if the driving issue goes away, so do many of the participants. You need a pressing, immediate battle to really rally the troops. . . .

    –ME “Liz” Strauss

    Related
    NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

    Share This

    Net Neutrality 7-27-2006

    Filed Under Business Life, Community, SOB Business, Successful Blog, Trends | Leave a Comment

    Net Neutrality Links

    I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

    Influencing the political process for advancment of technology

    Need an example? Think about IM in the context of what it really is…delivering text messages. How much revenue do you think the Netheads make from IM? Combine AIM, MSN and Yahoo all together. How much revenue do you think the wireless carriers make from text messagin? Who wins the revenue war?

    That isn’t the only place the Bellheads win. Look to political process. I’ve often wondered about our own ranks. Jeff Pulver. David Isenberg. Tom Evslin. Several others. Leading voices fighting the battle from without rather than stepping into the political fray of politics to redirect the system from within. If we’re going to win some measure of control away from the Bellheads, there is only one way. The political power base needs to shift. Netheads have to become the influencers of policy, something we are clearly not today.

    –ME “Liz” Strauss

    Related
    NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

    Share This

    Net Neutrality 6-19-2006

    Filed Under Business Life, Community, Successful Blog, Trends | 2 Comments

    Net Neutrality Links

    I’ve added these links to the Net Neutrality Page today.

    Can I see or detect if my internet traffic is differentiated?

    There is a post at Save The Internet, that alleges Cox Communications of blocking Craigslist for almost three months. The security company Authentium, who handles security for Cox Communications reportedly explained with technical details why users can not reach Craigslist website. It looks like there is problem with the computers that hosts the craigslist website. Here is the reply from rnapier, strongly suggesting that the behaviour is normal and as per the specification. . . .

    Net Neutrality by Hugh Hewitt

    On yesterday’s program, Larry Kudlow ripped into “net neutrality” as one would expect a vigorous free marketeer like LK to do. “Net neutrality” does indeed mean Congressional intervention into the operation of the internet.

    Here’s a roundtable/primer on the subject, courtesy of the Wharton School. (HT: Blinq.)

    Take Action on Net Neutrality

    I do not begrudge these companies their profits. I do get a bit pissy when Time Warner Cable is reaching into my pocket each month mulitiple times. In other words, I pay them my monthly access fee and then I pay them through Google or Yahoo or CNN for any fees these companies impose on services I currently receive for free. You see these companies have to turn around and give part of my money to Time Warner Cable for their top tier status. Wait! Pissy doesn’t begin to describe how that makes me feel.

    Here’s a “what if” for you. A high school teacher gives an assignment that involves researching several specific web sites for data. If the internet service providers have limited access to any of these sites or reserved access to them for only their highest paying customers, what happens when students in a public school try to complete their research? Will only the wealthiest students have access to this information on their home computers. Will other students be forced to find other ways to access this data? Will our high schools be forced to stop encouraging internet research and technical advancement because it is simply out of reach for some students? This is more than likely a big stretch, but it is something to think about.

    –ME “Liz” Strauss

    Related
    NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

    Share This

    Net Neutrality 6-12-2006

    Filed Under Business Life, Community, Successful Blog, Trends | 6 Comments

    Net Neutrality Links

    I’ve added these links to the Net Neutrality Page today.

    Why has Web 2.0 Been (Relatively) Quiet on Net Neutrality??

    The point is that I searched through Technorati, and could not find the usual Web 2.0 suspects writing, but just pointing people to fun videos that are cutesy; they are not really taking the banner of Net Neutrality.

    I have discussed this with a couple of other bloggers - and wonder if Web 2.0 has not rushed to this because they are so caught up with themselves. Do they think that the banners of open source, community Web, and whatever the buzz words du jour are going to save their companies? If you look at the Web 2.0 sites -Facebook, Riya, YouTube, Second Life, Songbird, BitTorrent and others - they are total bandwidth hogs. Look at how much Second Life is growing, to the point that it is holding virtual conferences, virtual concerts. But at least is it suited to find ways around the potential costs of the loss of Net Neutrality, as it already charges for membership.

    And, well, since Friday it is even a bigger issue since the House rejected Net Neutrality.

    Now, while the big Net companies - MSFT, Google, Yahoo - have been to the hill to fight for Net Neutrality, the other side of the debate has just been as active. But is smarter and better at lobbying. Just imagine if the Web 2.0 companies rallied their users to send a letter or email to their Senators and Congressman. Would not those voices be heard, or am I a little too Mr. Smith Goes To Washington?

    Net Neutrality: Who voted for What?

    The largest telephone and cable companies such as AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and Time Warner want to be able to decide which websites run fast, slow or not at all. They want to be able to charge extra money for fast service and if web sites don’t pay extra then they’ll be doomed to a slow connection.

    Net Neutrality wants to ensure that all sites get equal treatment.
    The supporters of Net Neutrality include leading high-tech companies such as Amazon.com, Earthlink, EBay, Google, Intel, Microsoft, Skype, Vonage and Yahoo. Prominent national figures such as Internet pioneer Vint Cerf, Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig and FCC Commissioner Michael Copps have called for stronger Net Neutrality protections.

    For More Information check out the Net Neutrality FAQ
    Yesterday the House of Representatives voted NO for Net Neutrality. The list below shows the people who voted. I have arranged them by state so you can easily see how your representative voted. If you are FOR Net Neutrality and your representative voted NO then don’t vote for him/her in the next elections.
    [THE COMPLETE VOTING LIST FOLLOWS]

    The Marching Morons Strike Again Read more

    Share This

    Net Neutrality 6-10-2006

    Filed Under Business Life, Community, Successful Blog, Trends | Leave a Comment

    Net Neutrality Links

    I’ve added these links to the Net Neutrality Page today.

    Hands off whose Internet?

    I find it fascinating that whenever corporations are forced to act in an egalitarian manner they resort to the ‘stifling innovation’ argument. Yet it is patently absurd to assume that governmental enforcement of net neutrality or lack thereof will have any marked effect on this hypothetical ‘next generation’ internet. It will come when it comes, no sooner and no later, and it will be the telecom companies who pay for it or somebody else will swoop in and do it for them. Why? Because there is money to be made and an entire global economy with which to keep pace, that’s why.

    Assume if you will that net neutrality fails and the big telecoms are allowed to run amok with their plans to create a tiered internet system. With all that extra money, is it more likely that they will reinvest in the infrastructure and create a better product? Or will they do the same thing they do with their Bush tax cuts and buy an extra Porsche or twelve? Besides, do you really want your next-gen internet molded in the vision of telecom corporations or would you rather have one created democratically, even if it takes a few months (at the most) longer?

    To take the other side, if net neutrality passes and the big telecoms are forced to keep the internet traffic moving as it already is – in other words, do nothing different than they have been doing from the beginning – do you really think they won’t lay the infrastructure for next-gen internet? Of course they will! They are just as much in competition with each other for your patronage and when the technology comes of age they will all battle to be the first to offer enhanced service. And if they act like spoiled brats and follow through with their threats then other companies and investors will seize the opportunity and render the existing telecoms obsolete. I mean, how many wagon wheel companies refused to get into the auto trading business. Adios Antiguos!

    Defeat for net neutrality backers

    US politicians have rejected attempts to enshrine the principle of net neutrality in legislation.
    Some fear the decision will mean net providers start deciding on behalf of customers which websites and services they can visit and use.

    The vote is a defeat for Google, eBay and Amazon which wanted the net neutrality principle protected by law.

    Setback for Internet coalition
    House OKs bill to make subscription TV market more competitive

    The measure spells out new rules that would create national franchises, allowing telephone companies to get into the cable television business without first having to obtain licenses from municipal authorities, as is currently the case.

    In the floor debate Thursday, several Democrats spoke out in favor of the bill’s trade-off — a free hand to telephone companies when it comes to pricing new Internet services in return for their entry into the cable market.

    “This bill does a lot and goes a long way to making sure that the cost of cable television will be reduced,” said Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill.

    Reps. Anna Eshoo of Palo Alto and Zoe Lofgren of San Jose expressed bewilderment that the House would vote, as Lofgren said, to “turn the Internet into the equivalent of cable TV.”

    Now the Internet coalition, which includes such Silicon Valley giants as Google, eBay and Yahoo, must focus on the Senate, where it faces an uphill battle. The House added language that acknowledges the importance of network neutrality but stopped short of giving the FCC the regulatory powers that Markey had sought.

    The current Senate bill has less language on network neutrality.

    –ME “Liz” Strauss

    Related
    NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

    Share This

    « go back — keep looking »