Comments on: Net Neutrality

By: » Broadband Regulation: Will Congress Neuter the Net? | Benton Foundation

Sat, 22 Jul 2006 02:11:47 +0000

[...] Pete Ashdown’s Campaign Journal ” Net Neutrality … when the regulation takes the form of something that seems as benign as “net neutrality” it is difficult … me that lack of regulation for net neutrality allows a provider to … [...]

By: » Choice of A New Generation –Hands off the Internet

» Choice of A New Generation –Hands off the Internet — Thu, 20 Jul 2006 15:44:45 +0000

[...] Pete Ashdown s Campaign Journal Net NeutralityNow some have told me that lack of regulation for net neutrality allows a provider to block access to websites that they find objectionable. Commercial censorship if you will. [...]

By: akiblogs » How The Internet Works: It Is Just a Series of Tubes!

akiblogs » How The Internet Works: It Is Just a Series of Tubes! — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 08:55:52 +0000

[...] Thus quoth the Senator in a speech given on the 28th of june 2006 about network neutrality. [...]

By: Marginalia » Net Neutrality

Marginalia » Net Neutrality — Wed, 05 Jul 2006 10:43:48 +0000

[...] For a long time (at least a few months), I was firmly on the side of net neutrality proponents. But then I read Pete Ashdown’s position. For those who don’t know, Pete Ashdown is the Democrat running against Orrin Hatch for the U.S. Senate. He’s also the founder of Xmission, Utah’s first ISP. He’s a progressive guy, who seems to understand the internet and the policy issues around it. His interview with Wired News showed me how a net neutrality law could potentially be bad for consumers: I tend more to take an anti-regulation standpoint on the internet, and (though) it is very easy to say, “We don’t want the government censoring the internet,” it becomes a much more complex issue when we’re talking about net neutrality. “Well we should have the government confirm that neutrality, and guarantee it.” But does that mean that I can’t prioritize video traffic and voice traffic in my own network, (which) is obviously needed, that has to be more of a real-time situation? You know, for a long time I prioritized gaming traffic, because that’s what my customers desire. [...]

By: Pete Ashdown’s Campaign Journal » A Series of Tubes

Pete Ashdown’s Campaign Journal » A Series of Tubes — Sun, 02 Jul 2006 18:44:40 +0000

[...] I had a long conversation with a concerned voter over my Net Neutrality position yesterday. He stated that I was putting too much trust into the corporations and the telcos to do the “right thing”. Through extensive experience, I realize that they’ll usually do the self-serving thing, but this is difficult to do on the Internet. The best example of this is China’s attempt to control the Internet, which yet again, had another method demonstrated this week of how to bypass it. Activists continue to raise the spectres of restricted free-speech, corporate agendas, and toll booths on the Internet, yet I have seen time and time again that the regulatory approach towards resolving problems of the Internet is not effective. I am proud of the role I had in crafting anti-spam and anti-spyware legislation, but I fully realized beforehand that it would have very little effect on the actual problem. Instead of lamenting the lack of laws, I went back to work at my business and worked on real solutions. My opponent applauds the flavor of the week for filtering the Internet, yet I’ve been giving effective solutions to parents for over a decade without the help of my government representatives. [...]

By: Bradley Blackham

Bradley Blackham — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 20:21:35 +0000

Network Neutrality is a very deceptive issue at first. Sissy Republicans think that just because it falls into the category of “Anti-trust law” that it’s bad for the economy to impose it on Bell South. The two tier system proposed will create a “Standard” and a “Deluxe” service available to everyone! don’t you like more options!!! Ignoring the fact that two tier system allocates the same bandwith; the ‘fast-track’ will be stupendous for the wealthy. That’s what this party’s all about anyway, stealing from the poor to give to the rich.

By: Scott

Scott — Thu, 15 Jun 2006 12:44:29 +0000

“We Are the World” meets ‘Net neutrality

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060614-7053.html

pretty funny… I’m surprised but glad that it’s come this far

By: James Lee Vann

James Lee Vann — Tue, 16 May 2006 05:22:37 +0000

My above comment was meant to be directed at “Information Retrival”.

By: James Lee Vann

James Lee Vann — Tue, 16 May 2006 05:16:48 +0000

Well said- but I want to point out one thing- It may not always be in the nations best interest to arrest a known terrorist immediatly. If law enforcement is listening in on terrorist phone calls and gaining information, they would immediatly lose that source of information after arresting the suspect (terrorist). Of course, obtaining a legal warrant for the wire tap would be prefferred.

Good luck with your campaign, I’ll tell all of my Utah friends to vote for you. (I really don’t like Orin Hatch)

By: Jo-Pete

Jo-Pete — Mon, 15 May 2006 14:58:30 +0000

The telecomm companies may learn over time that limitting bandwidth for non-premium websites is a bad idea, but is it really a good idea to let them shoot the collective internet community in the foot to find out that it hurts? I understand that pure neutrality could be detrimental if it means that ISPs can’t block the “bad guys,” but considering the tech expertise of the majority of the population, do you think they would assume that because “myCoolButLowBudgetWebsite.com” doesn’t show up as quickly as Disney.com, that it’s their ISPs fault? I think the majority of users would just assume that the low budget site couldn’t afford enough bandwidth. What about grass-roots political sites? Should they be allowed to be stifled simply because they can’t bribe the big telecomm companies?