|
Fcc
|
View this Thread in Original format
| sensorium |
Special interests suck and so does the FCC lawsuit record.
I have yet to understand how big companies like Time Warner/Comcast would rather invest in lobbying instead of renovating their infrastructures to provide faster internet. Walking backwards will bite them in the ass eventually.
Netflix messed up by folding though. IPs should not manipulate traffic like that.
The merger between Time Warner and Comcast also sucks. I am with the former currently. The moment Comcast takes over and starts charging me for data caps, I'm out.
What's thoroughly comical though is having your current FCC leader. Who comes up with stuff like that? How he got there only speaks of the amount of corruption that still exists in a democracy which claims to be one of the best out there, or the best. |
|
|
| Sushipunk |
| quote: | Originally posted by sensorium
The moment Comcast takes over and starts charging me for data caps, I'm out. |
You'd LOL so hard if I told you what internet costs here in Australia, with our massively data caps. And I won't even start on mobile data caps, because that's even more of a joke.
You guys whine a lot about internet over there, but you have no idea just how good you've got it... for now :p |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sushipunk
You'd LOL so hard if I told you what internet costs here in Australia, with our massively data caps. And I won't even start on mobile data caps, because that's even more of a joke.
You guys whine a lot about internet over there, but you have no idea just how good you've got it... for now :p |
nah, i disagree. sure, we have caps which is a bit gay, and ty copper for the main, but we are not beholden to monopolies who own the actual infrastructure we use. if your ISP started shaping your bandwidth to a website of a competitor, you could simply change ISPs at will. in the US, since so much of the actual pipes/wire is owned by the ISP, you have far less options.
the fact they're trying to institute something (net neutrality) that should already ing exist, is a ing joke. |
|
|
| Psyshell |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
the fact they're trying to institute something (net neutrality) that should already ing exist, is a ing joke. |
Plenty of our ISPs have download quota free zones which would seem to violate net neutrality to me. Mine implements QoS on various things, including making youtube the only high bandwidth thing that can be used at certain times of the day so that would most certainly violate net neutrality as well.
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
you could simply change ISPs at will. in the US, since so much of the actual pipes/wire is owned by the ISP, you have far less options. |
Also there are certain places in the country that only have one operator at the dslam so if that gets congested and they decide that something you don't like gets a higher priority on their QoS then you're buggered. It might be better on average here though.
I don't think currently any ISPs in the US are massively slowing down content to any sites though. It's more theoretical. We'd be equally as buggered if both optus and telstra slowed down content here. They do hold a near duopoly on certain types of infrastructure. |
|
|
| Psyshell |
| What's with all the pent up hostility and negativity lately? Do you need to start a thread about it? |
|
|
| Jon_Snow |
Companies like to pitch unlimited but the truth is bandwidth is finite. Sometimes caps aren't bad my phone connectivity speed has improved after they implemented a cap.
Cable companies are bad because they sell content and internet access. They're always trying to push you to view their content. When people dropped their tv infavor of Netflix services they have been looking to recoup loss by charging more for internet or slowing down sites that compete against them. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by Psyshell
pent up hostility |
I don't think you know what this means. :p |
|
|
| Psyshell |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jon_Snow
Companies like to pitch unlimited but the truth is bandwidth is finite. |
It sounds like you don't know much about the subject. If a company has enough bandwidth at their local exchange and at every section of their infrastructure (including overseas links) to allow every customer of theirs to access stuff at full speed then customers will always be able to use their full bandwidth (assuming the websites, servers etc allow). Things slowing down during peak times is probably due to companies not having enough bandwidth at their local exchange for the number of customers they get at peak time to use it at full speed at that time so things get slowed down. There are also some technologies like hfc that get slower when more users are on it regardless though. I know over here adsl wise there are some ISPs that will give full speed 24/7 for an adsl connection that are more expensive or have a cap and there are others that are less expensive or uncapped that may sometimes slow down during peak usage. No doubt in certain situations there'd be a choice between an ISP that never gets congested and one that does if you've got a variety of technologies and ISPs avaliable.
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
I don't think you know what this means. :p |
It seems to work in context. |
|
|
|
|
