No one (like verizon, google, at&t, microsoft, cablevision, etc.) should be able to be in the business of laying cables AND being any kind of information or service provider that utilizes those cables and/or that network infrastructure. There simply is an inherent vertically integrated conflict of interest that gives a huge unfair advantage to the cable or phone company in question. We need to separate these two areas:... more »
is what this country needs. Google had the right idea when it announced in the last few days that they'd be trying out a gigabit fully neutral internet connection for maybe up to 500,000 users. that's a gigabit UP and DOWN... with no data shaping. no looking at our data. no limits. and a cost of only about $20 a month... If you look at what happened to the economy in the wake of the commercialization of the internet,... more »
I just attended the Open Internet and Innovation workshop in Boston yesterday, and I was disturbed by the basic tone, which was, "gee, how can we keep making money with this thing to keep it alive?" There were a lot of ideas that seemed to me very similar to the way network operators were thinking, pre-internet-era. The current internet has become too polluted by large corporate stakeholders who have their own selfish... more »
The Internet is free and open infrastructure that provides almost unlimited support for free speech, free enterprise and free assembly. Nothing in human history, with the possible exception of movable type -- has done more to encourage all those freedoms. We need to be very careful about how we regulate it, especially since it bears only superficial resemblances to the many well-regulated forms of infrastructure it alters... more »
Would anyone agree that the current root threat to neutrality on the Internet is caused by the lack of funding for the infrastructure needed to support the services used on the Internet today, specifically the last mile infrastructure?