[TriLUG] Internet Neutrality

[Brian via TriLUG]

On 09/08/2017 07:37 PM, Tadd Torborg wrote:
> I’m grateful that we have it here in the big city.

Respectfully, this sounds a bit like the "I've got mine" mentality.  /I/ 
don't live in a big city, and fortunately DOCSIS (internet over CATV) is 
available.  My parents live in an area where DOCSIS is not, and likely 
never will be, available, but DSL is feasible.  If it weren't for 
federal regulation, people that live in yet-more-rural areas would still 
be lacking in electricity and telephone service because it isn't 
profitable to serve them.

Aside: I've heard satellite internet mentioned a number of times as a 
competitive technology to terrestrial services.  With round-trip times 
that physically can never be shorter than ~250 ms, it really isn't.  If 
you can't do VoIP over a particular mechanism, it's not a competitor.

 > Personally I’m not so worried about [...]

It doesn't matter whether it's concern for popular video streaming or 
access to back issues of 2600 magazine.  The point of net neutrality is 
to ensure that ISPs can't hinder, or boost, access to /anything/ for 
/anyone/ for /any reason/.

> I’d prefer to look for competition and technology to fix this than to
> grant power over our data to some agency that we don’t appear to have a
> say in regulating.

Competition and technology would be the ideal way to fix this, but 
existing regulations and monopolies have choked off both.  "Hey, you 
have this great idea for a land-based way of delivering terabit internet 
service to folks over fish tank air hose?  That's awesome!  Oh, you want 
to put your air hoses on our telephone poles?  Now wait just a minute 
there, bub..."  This is precisely the thing that has interfered with the 
deployment of competing services such as Google Fiber and municipal 
broadband.

-B