Net neutrality is DEAD. Get over it, Internet | Computerworld

Net neutrality is DEAD. Get over it, Internet | Computerworld.

Now we’re getting more information.  Not necessarily conflicting information but we still have to wonder why Verizon is pushing this?   Or are they?  A while ago I posted an article that nailed Verizon as the original, and apparently the only, lawsuit filer.  OK, I can believe this.  If it can increase their profit, they’re going to do it for their stock holders.  But then why are the other providers (as far as I can tell) staying away from the lawsuit. And the above link takes you to an article tending to confirm that. The reality is,  profit doesn’t seem to be much of an incentive to be for or against Internet Neutrality.

Remember we’re talking about a lot of broadband providers – Wired and Wireless.  Verizon, AT&T, Sprint,  AOL, Comcast, Windstream, MY provider for sure.  So think about it, the public has made it plain  that they want Net Neutrality. Hundreds, if not thousands, of providers made it plain  that they want Net Neutrality.  IF all this is the case, what is Verizon’s motivation and what is the FCC’s motivation to allow Verizon’s hands to play in their pockets

Any thoughts?

Posted in Internet, Neutrality | Leave a comment

1 Darrell Issa

Darrell Issa
Yesterday the House passed the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act, H.R. 3086. This bill permanently bans internet access taxes. Check out my video to hear more about why this is good for Americans.

 

1 Darrell Issa.

Posted in Internet, Neutrality | Leave a comment

Comcast will cap your use

Those of you that are using Comcast as your ISP may have heard that Comcast is taking the unusual step of limiting your usage.  Not surprisingly, they are being rather vague about just when they’ll do it and what the cap might be.  And of course, they won’t limit you – they’ll just charge more if you use more than the base amount of date.

Sources say that Comcast has already started doing this in some of their market areas – not surprisingly, the less competitive ones.

Most discussions seems to center around the 300-500 gig per month but there are other numbers floating around.

As a service provider myself, I’m not opposed to a ‘pay for what you use’ philosophy.  It’s how I have to do business as a hosting provider because it’s how my provider works too.  I buy disk space and bandwidth from a tier one provider and resell it to you.  My disk space and bandwidth are limited too how much I pay for and that’s how I sell it.

To help you understand, there’s really a lot more than disk space and bandwidth.

Disk space essentially means the amount of data that you store on the server but it’s much more than that.  There’s the disk itself,  the computer that it’s on, the data center that houses it all, the UPS that makes sure the power is smooth and provides battery backup when the utility power fails be it a fraction of a second or several hours.  And of course, all this has to be kept at a stable temperature and humidity.  Disk space really means the data center that provides your hosting service.

Bandwidth translates to the amount of data that you put onto the Internet.  It’s bi-directional, so requests to view a web page from a user and the web page itself are included in the bandwidth number.  So is incoming and outgoing email.  But bandwidth goes passed that.  It’s the hundreds of miles of fiber optic cables, copper wires, and electronic equipment like firewalls, switches, and routers that make the Internet do all the great things that it does.

So paying for the amount of resources that you use is just common sense.  Disk space and bandwidth are cheap but all those resources behind the scenes are not.  Hopefully, Comcast and the others that follow will use restraint

Posted in Internet, Web Hosting | Leave a comment

Will the new net neutrality law impact you?

What is “Net Neutrality?”

A lot has been said about the issue of “Net neutrality” (or more correctly, “Internet neutrality”) since the term “Internet” was first used in 1974. The history of the Internet is full of technical terms and concepts and involves worldwide agencies, corporations and organizations, but one thing was always in the forefront of the planning and implementation; Service providers should treat all data on the Internet equally, not discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, site, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or modes of communication.

What is the problem?

The United States Government has recently changed all that. The FCC has stated repeatedly that their proposed regulations and those recently enacted will not affect consumers.  But the FCC, being a government entity, is prone to saying things a bit remote from the truth.  New FCC rules effectively put an end to net neutrality – the concept that all network data is equal.  What has worked flawlessly and without complaints from anyone since the inception of the Internet has become null and void thanks to a lawsuit against the FCC by Verizon.

For the simplest explanation, follow the money. That almost always works.

The new FCC rules allow companies like Verizon, Netflix, Amazon, YouTube and, in the interest of fairness, MomAndPop.com, to pay network providers to give their content a higher priority.  In other words, contrary to what has always been the case, companies can now pay for higher priority and therefor higher speed and response time to their sites.  Follow the money.

I’m just a user.  Why do I care?

If the new regulations go into full effect, Internet users worldwide will see their service affected.  Amazon will be fast. The MomAndPap.com you like to buy from will be slow. YouTube will be serving video at a preferred rate, the cute puppies pictures that your breeder put up will be slower to load.  Almost all content will be prioritized by how much money the website owner pays to their provider.

How about the site owners?

The impact on you, the small website owner could be significant if not severe.  This is especially true if you are selling products or services.  You will probably suffer a double hit.

The first impact is fairly obvious. Remember that today’s technology permits network providers to know whether you’re a personal website, an eCommerce site, streaming video or just about anything else. If Amazon can afford to pay for a higher priority than you can (and that will probably be the case) your website will be slower and less responsive. Guess who gets the business? If you are trying to display video on your site, and you can’t (or don’t) pay up, you won’t get the priority that YouTube paid for; Your video might be more like a series of disjointed stills.  You may have to pay premiums to get your site seen.

The second hit on the average website owner is a little less obvious. I, as a web hosting service provider, may have to pay a premium to my provider to remain competitive on two fronts.  If DogHouseHosting.com (the site that sells my service) is slower than my competitor’s, nobody will find me. I might be forced to pay my provider for higher priority in order to get customers.  If the service that I provide (YOUR website) is slow, you might go to someone else. I might be forced to pay for that higher priority to keep customers.

In either of these cases, I, or whoever provides your web hosting service, will be passing those costs on to you.  Our margins are too low not to.

For even more on the new rules, check this Huffington Post article or Google “Net Neutrality.”

Posted in Internet, Neutrality | 1 Comment