• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Net Neutrality?

Can you explain your stance against QoS being involved in discussions surrounding Net Neutrality? To me, QoS is central to the debate, like Uranium to nuclear weapons.
 
I'm not against it, i'm against discussions of future theories of network technologies detailing the thread. A little side topic is always ok.


If you read my previous posts you'll find my arguments as to why it's not central to the debate, it's central to the propaganda. In my opinion.
 
EarlyMon said:
I'm not against it, i'm against discussions of future theories of network technologies detailing the thread. A little side topic is always ok.


If you read my previous posts you'll find my arguments as to why it's not central to the debate, it's central to the propaganda. In my opinion.
Click to expand...

I have read many of your posts in this thread, and don't quite understand...Net Neutrality is almost entirely about fighting the effort to use QoS to limit paying customers' access to competing services, and milk more money out of both customers and peers.
 
knivesout said:
I have read many of your posts in this thread, and don't quite understand...Net Neutrality is almost entirely about fighting the effort to use QoS to limit paying customers' access to competing services, and milk more money out of both customers and peers.
Click to expand...

Sorry, will try to clarify, you're right.

Do they use and want to expand use of QoS as an excuse to limit paying customers' access to competing services, and milk more money out of both customers and peers?

Yes.

Are there QoS issues?

Certainly.

Will limiting paying customers' access to competing services, and milking more money out of both customers and peers solve QoS issues?

Not very likely.
 
EarlyMon said:
Sorry, will try to clarify, you're right.

Do they use and want to expand use of QoS as an excuse to limit paying customers' access to competing services, and milk more money out of both customers and peers?

Yes.

Are there QoS issues?

Certainly.

Will limiting paying customers' access to competing services, and milking more money out of both customers and peers solve QoS issues?

Not very likely.
Click to expand...

Not sure we're speaking the same language here, it sounds like you're referring to QoS as in "the customer's quality of the video they watched" or similar, whereas in the networking sense QoS is related to policing of bandwidth on a protocol or host/destination basis.
 
EarlyMon said:
OK - at this point, it's gone way past sub-topic and well into off-topic.

Net neutrality is an important issue.

There's much for newcomers to learn and absorb on the subject.

Spectrum use and future potential will simply turn others off.

Please take this side discussion to a new thread, if there's any interest.

As for this thread, let's recognize that it's ok to agree to disagree and move back on-topic.
Click to expand...

SO HOW ABOUT? Anyone want to start a technical discussion thread about radio, microwaves, hidden alien radio technology secretly owned by Applesoft or Microapple?

I'll play.

Bob
 
Bob Maxey said:
SO HOW ABOUT? Anyone want to start a technical discussion thread about radio, microwaves, hidden alien radio technology secretly owned by Applesoft or Microapple?

I'll play.

Bob
Click to expand...

LOL, that whole discussion has got to go somewhere else; I have no idea how it ended up in this thread.
 
knivesout said:
Not sure we're speaking the same language here, it sounds like you're referring to QoS as in "the customer's quality of the video they watched" or similar, whereas in the networking sense QoS is related to policing of bandwidth on a protocol or host/destination basis.
Click to expand...

Strict network management definition only.
 
EarlyMon said:
Strict network management definition only.
Click to expand...

In that case...

I think "fair and reasonable" network management practices are being considered (and have been used, in Comcast's case) for excuses to artificially limit customer's access to certain hosts and protocols. I do understand that in Comcast's case with bittorrent, there are real problems with high amounts of upstream TCP connections in a DOCSIS network, but those are issues Comcast has to scale to meet if they are going to compete. Unfortunately, there isn't much incentive to compete, since they enjoy what amounts to a near monopoly in many of the areas they service, often with only one competitor serving the same household.
 
Just can't believe this is happening. AT&T just capped my data at 250GB per month, now I may eligible for felony charges if I download certain media files...what is going ON, America?
 
They're just getting started - Obama "IP czar" wants felony charges for illegal Web streaming - but what constitutes illegal?

And how do you think that will mesh with - Obama administration endorses new privacy regs, Do Not Track

And the penny drops, the lights come on, and business finally figured out who was playing whom - CCIA: copyright wiretaps are Hollywood's "PATRIOT Act"

Does all that tie to net neutrality and if so, how?

I think it does, directly and tangentially. Washington has been behind the digital curve for a long time - and while we were laughing at that, they were smarting.

Now they've learned that can count on corporate greed and we've learned a few politicians and bureaucrats are still masters at divide and conquer. Seems Washington still knows a few things about control that business didn't count on.

Like I said earlier - the camel gets into the tent by sticking his nose in first. And we'll foot the bills.
 
Welcome to America the police state.

I'm sure we've all seen the same predictions all of our lives about how the USA would become a police state. I thought that was so ridiculous back in the day. Well, here we are. And it happens right in front of everyone, and they still allow it. Unbelievable.
 
EarlyMon said:
Must read, must write your congress-critter -

Congress told that Internet data caps will discourage piracy
Click to expand...

Daniel Castro is and always has been a high paid mouthpiece.

EarlyMon said:
They're just getting started - Obama "IP czar" wants felony charges for illegal Web streaming - but what constitutes illegal?

And how do you think that will mesh with - Obama administration endorses new privacy regs, Do Not Track

And the penny drops, the lights come on, and business finally figured out who was playing whom - CCIA: copyright wiretaps are Hollywood's "PATRIOT Act"

Does all that tie to net neutrality and if so, how?

I think it does, directly and tangentially. Washington has been behind the digital curve for a long time - and while we were laughing at that, they were smarting.

Now they've learned that can count on corporate greed and we've learned a few politicians and bureaucrats are still masters at divide and conquer. Seems Washington still knows a few things about control that business didn't count on.

Like I said earlier - the camel gets into the tent by sticking his nose in first. And we'll foot the bills.
Click to expand...

This administration scares the hell out of me, far more so than any other ever has.

BlackDynamite said:
Welcome to America the police state.

I'm sure we've all seen the same predictions all of our lives about how the USA would become a police state. I thought that was so ridiculous back in the day. Well, here we are. And it happens right in front of everyone, and they still allow it. Unbelievable.
Click to expand...

That's because we're sheeple.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom