eridani
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Aug-31-10 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
| 8. It was built by the government and then taken over by private companies n/t |
| -AT&T Says Net Rules MUST Allow 'Paid Prioritization' |
snot |
Aug-31-10 09:46 PM |
#0 |
 -
make internet a public utlitity nt |
msongs |
Aug-31-10 09:48 PM |
#1 |
  -
YES!!! No one should own the only public square we've got left. |
snot |
Aug-31-10 09:50 PM |
#2 |
| -
It's built and maintained by private companies. |
boppers |
Aug-31-10 09:58 PM |
#6 |
| -
It was built by the government and then taken over by private companies n/t |
eridani |
Aug-31-10 10:08 PM |
#8 |
| -
Are you referring to ARPANET? |
boppers |
Aug-31-10 10:13 PM |
#11 |
| -
Yes. And don't forget that the TCP-IP protocol was established by the government n/t |
eridani |
Aug-31-10 10:52 PM |
#18 |
| -
That's a bit simplified. |
boppers |
Aug-31-10 11:30 PM |
#22 |
| -
OK, it was |
eridani |
Aug-31-10 11:57 PM |
#24 |
| -
That's how it's been working so far. |
boppers |
Aug-31-10 09:52 PM |
#3 |
| -
When carriers gain the ability to speed up or slow down certain sites |
TheMuse |
Aug-31-10 09:53 PM |
#4 |
| -
Did you read the article? |
boppers |
Aug-31-10 10:04 PM |
#7 |
| -
So I read it, and maybe I am dense |
TheMuse |
Aug-31-10 10:12 PM |
#10 |
| -
The priorities have been there all along, as have the "high speed" lanes. |
boppers |
Aug-31-10 10:34 PM |
#14 |
| -
This has nothing to do with buying a T-1 to get more bandwidth. |
ThomCat |
Aug-31-10 10:54 PM |
#19 |
| -
DNS does not work that way. Neither does TCP/IP. Nor does *cough* NANOG. |
boppers |
Aug-31-10 11:52 PM |
#23 |
| -
+1 nt |
woo me with science |
Sep-01-10 12:13 AM |
#28 |
| -
Are they trying to create a separate legal entity between wireless and internet? |
izzybeans |
Aug-31-10 09:54 PM |
#5 |
| -
They're trying to maintain the internet as it was designed and built. |
boppers |
Aug-31-10 10:09 PM |
#9 |
| -
AT&T finds new ways to blow! |
glitch |
Aug-31-10 10:24 PM |
#12 |
| -
If Net Neutrality "dies", so does the progressive movement. |
AdHocSolver |
Aug-31-10 10:27 PM |
#13 |
| -
+1000 nt |
laughingliberal |
Aug-31-10 10:36 PM |
#15 |
| -
How did it manage to live so far, then? |
boppers |
Aug-31-10 10:41 PM |
#16 |
| -
You clearly don't understand the difference between |
ThomCat |
Aug-31-10 11:17 PM |
#21 |
| -
You might be a bit surprised at what I know. :) |
boppers |
Sep-01-10 12:26 AM |
#29 |
| -
AT&T is from Bizzarro World, obviously, because the fundamental principles |
KakistocracyHater |
Aug-31-10 10:43 PM |
#17 |
| -
So why is this not a problem in other counties? |
Iterate |
Aug-31-10 11:16 PM |
#20 |
| -
Perhaps you ought to direct that question to boppers |
depakid |
Sep-01-10 12:03 AM |
#25 |
| -
One word: Infrastructure. |
boppers |
Sep-01-10 12:42 AM |
#30 |
| -
I've heard the excuses, I'm just not buying it. |
Iterate |
Sep-01-10 05:43 AM |
#32 |
| -
GREAT post! |
boppers |
Sep-02-10 12:45 AM |
#38 |
| -
There is a website that seems pretty good at discussing the issues for users. |
AdHocSolver |
Sep-01-10 12:04 AM |
#26 |
| -
Thank you. Time for the graphic again: |
woo me with science |
Sep-01-10 12:12 AM |
#27 |
| -
Does the internet already look like that? |
boppers |
Sep-01-10 12:47 AM |
#31 |
| -
Do they? |
woo me with science |
Sep-01-10 06:26 AM |
#34 |
| -
Per-site filtering, traffic prioritization, tiered access, per user bandwidth caps... |
boppers |
Sep-02-10 12:33 AM |
#37 |
| -
Yes, first the Supreme Court allows corporate free speech... |
Scuba |
Sep-01-10 06:01 AM |
#33 |
| -
Pls do not rely on boppers as your sole source re- the tech aspects of this. |
snot |
Sep-01-10 12:33 PM |
#35 |
| -
Al Franken is working to preserve net neutrality; here's how you can help: |
snot |
Sep-01-10 12:38 PM |
#36 |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread