I have a different view of Net Neutrality than most based on what I have read. That being said I am always open to additional info to sway me back to the masses belief that what the FCC has been proposing of late and the deal between Netflix and Comcast is completely bad for the internet as a whole. But first of course I find that with all the discussion around the topic, the person you don’t hear from is President Obama who in 2008 stated:
“I will take a backseat to no one in my commitment to net neutrality.”
That prompted today’s editorial cartoon as it seems everyone is driving the conversation around Net Neutrality with the exception of the President.
I could write a huge diatribe about my feelings about the Netflix/Comcast deal but I found an article by Maggie Reardon of CNET that helped explain some things better for me so it may help others as well. Check out her article here. This portion was particularly helpful:
“The other thing to realize about the Internet is that the network itself is a shared medium. Information is chopped into packets that traverse the Internet separately and are reassembled at their destinations. Packets from your email or a video you selected from Netflix travel alongside packets for everyone else’s data. Just like a highway where all cars are subject to the same speed limit, but still travel at different speeds due to the congested road, some packets arrive at their destination sooner than others.
For some forms of communication it doesn’t matter much if the packets arrive in order or if some arrive a little later than others. This is true of most text-based communications, such as text-based websites or email. But for other forms of communication, such as audio or video, it’s crucial that all packets arrive in order and in close succession. If some packets are delayed or dropped, the experience of the video or audio once the packets are reassembled is not pleasant. There’s often buffering, pixelation, and/or jitter.”
How I explain it:
Here is how I explained it to my wife and figure it worked for her that others might find it beneficial. Think of the internet like Amazon. You order from many manufacturers but the processing and delivery are all handled by an Amazon warehouse (let’s ignore the vendors that drop ship directly for this example). Let’s say Amazon has 100 bays to process items into the warehouse and 100 more to process items out of it. Everything flows well until too many manufacturers are trying to unload their items at the same time. It causes slow downs much like on the net.
With a company like Google (YouTube) or Netflix they are sending an abundance of trucks to the warehouse at any given time. This causes delays in them getting their items into the warehouse and therefore delays it getting out. This is what causes dithering or delays in video at times. So Amazon either has to build more bays or enlarge the ones they have to accommodate Netflix traffic. The question becomes who should pay for that? Should all Amazon customers pay for it or just the ones getting items from Netflix? Well one way to do that is to have Netflix pay for the upgrades and then Netflix can choose to eat the cost or pass it on only to their own customers.
But if everyone pays for faster access, won’t it hurt those without means to pay?:
One of the arguments I consistently read about the issue are from those that take the information highway analogy and liken it to ISPs creating a toll road. Right now they have the incentive to continue to expand and speed up all the roads. But what happens if they create a toll road for companies to gain faster access. Then ISP’s like Comcast will begin spending money only on infrastructure to make the toll roads faster and therefore leaving the “free roads” to maintain same speeds and service levels as today, never to increase again.
This is where I think the FCC and the President should be taking a stand. I don’t think it should be an open access to allow payments for every large company to take advantage of to the detriment of smaller companies. Rather I look at there being a download percentage limit. Right now YouTube and Netflix each account for over 10% of the total internet traffic. So let’s say the FCC rules state that any company with over 10% of the download traffic on the web can at their discretion enter into a mutually benefiting agreement with ISP’s to deliver the same uninterrupted service that others who don’t carry as large of data can enjoy. Notice I didn’t say faster.
To me the biggest hassle in traveling is dealing with the WIDE LOAD trucks that slow traffic for miles and impede my own travel. If the government created wide load lanes that the trucking companies had to pay to use but I didn’t get access to, I would be happy with the arrangement. They get a special lane and I my speed is not degraded to get to my destination at all.
So what do you think? Am I missing anything?
_________________________________________________
Charity Challenge Update
Week 2 let me know if I missed anyone.
Including Bearman in a Cartoon ($10):
Blogging about the Challenge ($5):
Adding me to Circles on Google Plus ($1):
- 483 People added me in this week.
Dollar for Dollar Match for Contributions to Crayons 2 Computers:
For a week two total of $1033 and meaning I went over the $2000 goal. HOWEVER:
I have made a decision that if we hit the limit of $1500 that I will still pay cartoonists for adding Bearman to their webcomic through the end of the month as well as match to the $500 limit. So I am adding the three toons from this week and I am going to keep matching even though I hit the 500 limit. So with the 1500 hit plus the $30 in webcomics from this week and the total of $620 in matching donations
I have committed to donating $2120 so far.
So no more payouts for blogging or adding me on G+ but if you are interested in getting involved with your webcomic or matching donation? See this post. And
Best way I can ask you to support those who support me is to visit their websites and check out the amazing work they are doing.
