ewv

"Net Neutrality" price controls vs. the free market

4 posts in this topic

A short u-tube

on the requirements for the expanding internet and why "net neutrality" legislation restricting free market prices is a coercive cost shifting device.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A short u-tube
on the requirements for the expanding internet and why "net neutrality" legislation restricting free market prices is a coercive cost shifting device.

Thanks for that ewv, that was clear and informative.

I wasn't sure what OC stood for, as in OC-48/OC-192/OC-768. Apparently it refers to "Optical Carrier", or fiber optic cabling.

From wikipedia:

Optical Carrier:

Optical Carrier levels describe a range of digital signals that can be carried on SONET fiber optic network.[1] The number in the Optical Carrier level is directly proportional to the data rate of the bitstream carried by the digital signal.

The general rule for calculating the speed of Optical Carrier lines is when a specification is given as OC-n, that the speed will equal n × 51.8 Mbit/s.

I also like the way they are endorsing a free market approach. Obvious to us, but they felt the need to say it.

A note about Spam, JPEG filtering is easy to do. Bayesian filters can handle both text and binary data and have been doing so for a long time. There are also continually updated black listed IP address databases maintained by places like spamhaus.org, and these take care of filtering email independent of content at any time. But, definitely spam is a real problem, because of the sheer volume of it. One possible solution to that would be to redefine the Internet protocol so that anonymous data is harder to send and easier to track.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A short u-tube
on the requirements for the expanding internet and why "net neutrality" legislation restricting free market prices is a coercive cost shifting device.

I don't know if I'd call net neutrality a "coercive cost shifting device," I'd say it's more like an unadulterated land grab.

I think the net neutrality debate is like the capitalism debate in that many who fight against net neutrality, like those that defend capitalism, have already accepted the basic premises of the other side. The anti-net-neutrality side treats the internet as if it were community property that "we" need to manage, like the pro-net-neutrality side. They just think the hands-off approach is the best way to maximize what the internet can offer. In all of the arguments you'll hear against net neutrality, here's one you'll never hear: The internet is private property, and those who own the pipes get to decide what they want to do with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know if I'd call net neutrality a "coercive cost shifting device," I'd say it's more like an unadulterated land grab.

Because it's government price controls, which is still "like an unadulterated land grab".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites