go for it. you could probably play dumb and say your company booked it and they screwed up. if they even bother.

well, are you zooming past the inner harbor now or are you in plastic handcuffs courtesy of amtrak police

Still alive. As with most things in wilmington, Amtrak ticketing is half assed. No one on platform and just got scanned in my seat. Can't wait for a dogfish 90 on the ride home, one of a lame business traveler's little victories in life.

TomatoPie wrote:

Bill McNeal wrote:Basically, net neutrality means that all content on the Internet is delivered at the same priority. So if you use your Comcast Internet connection to access google, aol, spotify or Netflix, it is all delivered at the same speed/priority (network conditions and distance etc. may affect that speed, making some services faster than others, but that would be a "natural" thing happening).

What Comcast, att, Verizon, etc. want to do, is make it so you (or someone) would have to pay to access things. Maybe they will make streaming video from third party services a higher tier or sell a social media package where the only things you can access are Facebook, Twitter, etc. and then you would have to pay for a "premium" tier to access other things, or make you view ads in exchange for certain access.

As a consumer, you don't want this. If you get 300 gb of access a month, then it can be porn, music, spreadsheets or whatever. Open access to the net.

Here's a different POV, and it matches mine.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/andy-kes ... 1415665771

It's dumb - prima facie - that Netflix should be able to hook its content firehose to Comcast and pay the same amount as others do for their occasional garden hose connection. Should the car wash pay the water utility the same amount as the cupcake store?

The push for net newt is indicative of how little anyone - especially government - understands how it works. The Internet thrives and grows without nanny bureaucrats required to approve rates and technologies.

Net Noot is a lovely concept -- and one that government is entirely inept to manage.

Comcast is a content provider as well as an ISP. These should be two distinct things that don't affect one another, which net neutrality would ensure. They can effectively stamp out their content competition by using their ISP to choke anyone they want to. I honestly have no idea how a byte from Netflix is different than a byte from Comcast or a byte from backshegoes? They can expand their bandwith if they want.

BigEd76 wrote:CBalls, the school loans get dropped from your credit history a few years after you pay them off. They don't stay on forever

Wait, people actually pay off their student loans? We've been paying my wife's for 15+ years with no end in sight.

pacino wrote:Comcast is a content provider as well as an ISP. These should be two distinct things that don't affect one another, which net neutrality would ensure. They can effectively stamp out their content competition by using their ISP to choke anyone they want to.

I think you've touched on the hot button for Noot Advocates - a bricolage of "what Comcast could do if we don't stop them." Those unfounded fears are a fundamental flaw of the whole 'rein em in' strategy that Nootiness seems to offer.

The answer, in normal markets, is that if Org X behaves so badly, consumers will exit and go to a competitor.

With ISPs, the ability to compete is limited - and hence Comcast has more opportunity to abuse customers.

But there is some competition in most markets, and Comcast cannot make itself a pariah, because that will surely induce Congressional hearings.

It's not perfect, but we're better off relying on (compromised) market forces, existing regulations, and Comcast's regard for its own reputation. Should we turn it all over to the FCC, any shot at growing the competition will be stifled, seated players will be entrenched and protected, and the regulatory agency will become self-serving as they all do. Noot World is an extreme answer to an imagined and exaggerated problem.

isn't net neutrality the "existing regulations"? how could it be an extreme answer

Houshphandzadeh wrote:isn't net neutrality the "existing regulations"? how could it be an extreme answer

Because that's what he read in the wsj Op-ed written by an ISP lobbyist

TomatoPie wrote:

pacino wrote:Comcast is a content provider as well as an ISP. These should be two distinct things that don't affect one another, which net neutrality would ensure. They can effectively stamp out their content competition by using their ISP to choke anyone they want to.

I think you've touched on the hot button for Noot Advocates - a bricolage of "what Comcast could do if we don't stop them." Those unfounded fears are a fundamental flaw of the whole 'rein em in' strategy that Nootiness seems to offer.

The answer, in normal markets, is that if Org X behaves so badly, consumers will exit and go to a competitor.

With ISPs, the ability to compete is limited - and hence Comcast has more opportunity to abuse customers.

But there is some competition in most markets, and Comcast cannot make itself a pariah, because that will surely induce Congressional hearings.

It's not perfect, but we're better off relying on (compromised) market forces, existing regulations, and Comcast's regard for its own reputation. Should we turn it all over to the FCC, any shot at growing the competition will be stifled, seated players will be entrenched and protected, and the regulatory agency will become self-serving as they all do. Noot World is an extreme answer to an imagined and exaggerated problem.

it's now 'what they could do', they already DID it to Netflix, as I've shown in the previous Comcast thread.

Your last paragraph is just bullshit. It's not 'turning it all over'. It's enforcing fairness and actually allowing innovation to take place.

pacino wrote:

TomatoPie wrote:

pacino wrote:Comcast is a content provider as well as an ISP. These should be two distinct things that don't affect one another, which net neutrality would ensure. They can effectively stamp out their content competition by using their ISP to choke anyone they want to.

I think you've touched on the hot button for Noot Advocates - a bricolage of "what Comcast could do if we don't stop them." Those unfounded fears are a fundamental flaw of the whole 'rein em in' strategy that Nootiness seems to offer.

The answer, in normal markets, is that if Org X behaves so badly, consumers will exit and go to a competitor.

With ISPs, the ability to compete is limited - and hence Comcast has more opportunity to abuse customers.

But there is some competition in most markets, and Comcast cannot make itself a pariah, because that will surely induce Congressional hearings.

It's not perfect, but we're better off relying on (compromised) market forces, existing regulations, and Comcast's regard for its own reputation. Should we turn it all over to the FCC, any shot at growing the competition will be stifled, seated players will be entrenched and protected, and the regulatory agency will become self-serving as they all do. Noot World is an extreme answer to an imagined and exaggerated problem.

it's now 'what they could do', they already DID it to Netflix, as I've shown in the previous Comcast thread.

I'm a Netflix subscriber - and I love it. But that's not adequate reason to have the interest of those drinking from the Netflix firehose to be subsidized, by law, by lighter users of an ISP's services. What happened between Netflix and Comcast was natural and normal, and it was resolved without nanny state oversight.

this doesn't limit someone's ability to buy more bandwith from Comcast, or for Comcast to increase bandwith. It limits Comcast's ability to purposely slow down traffic from competitors and from sites they simply dont like.

Tp, Netflix isn't "hooking it's fire hose up to Comcast's pipes" for free. Netflix connects to the Internet just like any other content provider and pays for bandwidth just like everyone else. Based on the numbers I've seen Netflix is paying like $.03 per GB of bandwidth (these are old numbers from 2009 so it's likely changed but still). You are paying Comcast whatever it is for 300 gb a month, what differnce does it make if your 300 gb are coming from Netflix, redbox streaming, Hulu, spotiify, redtube or thaipizzaporn.com?

Once you check out thaipizzaporn, you'll know

jersey, sorry if you saw a missed call on your cell. trying to call my neighbor who has the same name as you and somehow your cell # got dumped into his contact info. THANKS FACEBOOK

Someone talk me out of buying a World of Warcraft subscription. I figured the free trial would be enough, but I blasted through that in a few days and now I want more. So weird, I didn't even really like the game when I played it years ago.

idk, i love WOW

play a game that ends

pacino wrote:idk, i love WOW

Wanna form a guild?

i am currently abstaining for monetary reasons. saving bucks to pay bills. knock out any outstanding debt.