[SATLUG] OT: Official: FCC to propose 'Net neutrality' rules
by AP: Yahoo! Tech
Todd W. Bucy
toddwbucy at grandecom.net
Sat Sep 19 20:46:31 CDT 2009
dubose at texas.net wrote:
> Quoting ed <horned0wl93 at gmail.com>:
>> Maybe we're finally moving in the right direction?
> To carry this one step further, then ISPs couldn't block port 25 and 80 to/from
> your home computer.
> I think we know that internet bandwidth is limited by what the internet can
> afford to put on-line. If they could put on unlimited bandwidth, then no need
> to limit service. But that isn't the case. In many parts of the country,
> internet capacity is 1/10 of what is normally found in San Antonio. Thus,
> just for users to have limited E-Mail and web access, other services are limited.
> Its the same for roadways...in the country you have smaller roads and in
> cities express ways. Its just economics.
The way i see it this is a free speech issue, after all if money is
equal to free speech (something corporations are currently arguing for
in the Supreme Court) then blocking access to the particular services,
be it iptv, torrent traffic, or blocking home based webservers, amounts
to muzzling my free speech.
also the road analogy dosn't apply in this case as you have more trafi c
in the cities (thereby justifying bigger roads) then you do in rural
areas. Furthermore, private industry provide 99.9% of the internet
access where as the roads are a public venture.
More information about the SATLUG