http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/ Engadget Comments for FCC chairman formally proposes net neutrality rules http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:11PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/
Thanks Obama FCC. You are ruining the internet!

]]>Sep 21st 2009 2:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 22nd 2009 3:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:20PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:25PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 3:12PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/
+1 for big downloaders (i.e. torrent users)
-1 for casual web users

The net effect of this policy will be an increase of traffic on the internet. Either the networks retain similar infrastructure and performance slows down OR infrastructure upgrades and those costs are passed on to the consumer. Actually, the most likely situation is that there will be minimal network improvements and very large price spikes.

It's not liking big ISP's are going to simply enhance their network for more usage and then take those costs in the shorts. They will end up on your bill and my bill. For big DL'ers the cost increase will be worth it. For casual users you will get no benefit but have a higher bill.]]>Sep 21st 2009 3:12PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 3:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/
but you have to think about what about all those legit torrents. also there are some good things that can now happen and maybe not be apparent now. such as IPTV, IP telephone(not voip) is some of the things that can happen now since they are not restricted by the broadband provider.]]>Sep 21st 2009 3:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 4:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/
From the Cato Institute:

:New regulations inevitably come with unintended consequences. Indeed, today's network neutrality debate is strikingly similar to the debate that produced the first modern regulatory agency, the Interstate Commerce Commission. Unfortunately, rather than protecting consumers from the railroads, the ICC protected the railroads from competition by erecting new barriers to entry in the surface transportation marketplace. Other 20th-century regulatory agencies also limited competition in the industries they regulated. Like these older regulatory regimes, network neutrality regulations are likely not to achieve their intended aims. Given the need for more competition in the broadband marketplace, policymakers should be especially wary of enacting regulations that could become a barrier to entry for new broadband firms."

]]>Sep 21st 2009 4:52PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/
OMG POLITICAL INDOCTRINATION!!! CENSOR IT!!!

His education speech was nothing of that sort, but the Republicans just won't give up.]]>Sep 21st 2009 5:25PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/
FREEDOM
FREEDOM
FREEDOM to downloads....]]>Sep 21st 2009 6:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/
Bullshit! Do you knuckleheads not realize how much power you are putting in the hands of people that DONT answer to you? ISPs can be dumped for another, but the FCC WILL NOT GIVE A FLYING FUCK about some complaint from some geek when he finds that "net neutrality" may keep the "evil" ISPs under lock and key, but government will have a nice easy road right into your computer.


Just ask the Belgians how well neutrality worked for them. And THINK about trading freedom, even if its the freedom of people you dont think deserve it, for the E-nanny state.
]]>Sep 21st 2009 7:00PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/
Now, I'm against BitTorrent downloading of illegal software. That's a big part of it.

But other things, such as dumping your bandwidth for certain things, are just wrong. The government is supposed to step in and fix the problems. Bush let all the problems get so bad there was no turning back. You're acting like he did nothing wrong and Obama is to blame for every crisis there is.

Get with the program.]]>Sep 21st 2009 7:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/
WHERE IS THIS TAKING PLACE?? I'm still trying to find the "crisis" that people keep talking about, but cant seem to provide an personal example that doesn't involve massive file downloads and streaming on their part.

F*ing Obama-bots will sell out every freedom and liberty for a bucket of kool-aid and a warm puppy.

]]>Sep 21st 2009 7:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 23rd 2009 1:36AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/
and I can use slingplayer over 3g.

YAY.]]>Sep 21st 2009 2:14PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 3:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/
That was the case before OS 3.1. Now with OS 3.1 the carrier files have to be signed. Sure, there'll be hacks to get around that in the future, but it's still not as simple as it once was (if you updated).]]>Sep 21st 2009 3:32PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 6:10PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/
One can only hope.

Until this issue is resolved I'll just keep downloading my > 100MB podcasts and watch slingplayer videos over 3G using my MyFi, which is still doing all of this over 3G its just that the iPhone doesn't know that...]]>Sep 21st 2009 9:53PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/
however it doesn't mean that they can't put up bandwidth caps that would then cut you off from access, or cause you to have to pay more. something with tethering is more likely to invoke

also there's this 'harmful' thing. if a company can prove a certain function is harmful they might be able to get around the rule. so hopefully the rules will be conditional. such as ATT says they don't have the structure to support tethering without harming the non tethers. the FCC says 'okay no tethering for now. but you have X time to get things up and running or pay a huge fine/credit to your customers'

frankly I would rather see "no more simlocks on smart phones" than worry about the rest. although I am glad to see the possible ding on comcast. they shouldn't be allowed to pre-filter what everyone is doing. not when they have an out via the DCMA so long as they react if something hinky is pointed out to them. ]]>Sep 21st 2009 10:32PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:14PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:14PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/well, if he's not gonna take it, i will!]]>Sep 21st 2009 3:47PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 22nd 2009 8:37PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:17PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:46PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 5:04PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 11:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:33PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:34PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/ monopoly service any day), having only 1 choice in ISP company(yes, a government monopoly would be much better than a corporate one) for any single area hurts everyone except that ISP. Fix it.]]>Sep 21st 2009 2:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:39PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/Sep 21st 2009 2:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/
AT&T: 450Min - $39.99 + SMS Add $5
VERI: 450Min - $39.99 + SMS Add $10
SPRI: 450Min - $39.99 + SMS Add $10 for the Messaging Plan.
TMO: 300Min - $29.99 + SMS Add $5

I found all the same minute plans they cost the same, besides Tmobile ofcourse. All the prices are the same for 900Mins, 1350Mins, etc... Seem's like PRICE FIXING. Isn't that illegal? Yeah different providers have different features, rollover, select 5 people for free calls, better coverage than others but does that mean it's ok to have all the same prices? ]]>Sep 21st 2009 4:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/21/fcc-chairman-formally-proposes-net-neutrality-rules/
I think in the bigger picture, the three largest telcos owning the backbone of this country is the best move. All the spam mail and advertisements is better absorbed electronically rather than wasting millions of tons more paper by doing it through USPS, not to mention the extra fossil fuel required to ship all this junk mail to the people around the nation. Let USPS hadle package shipping and bulk freight. It's better that way.]]>Sep 21st 2009 4:57PM