On The Insider: Cougar Town Production Postponed
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 28 of 44:
Next »
« Previous
RE:Net Neutrality would not allow them.
I think this game has been called on account of darkness.

I believe we're at the point of rehashing the same arguments.

Your solution does not address my 2 concerns:
1)Equal access to the network-to-network information highway (just because the the big boys lease out their video lines does not mean they won't have a monopoly-like advantage, similar to how Microsoft can license out its desktop space. Even if you guaranteed equal pricing along with equal priority, the temptation would be there to add more services,leading to desertion of the lower speed network by those who could afford it).

2)Maintenance of quality on the lower cost information highway (the incentive to invest would be in the video network).


Thanks for the civilized debate.
Posted by: welcome to hell   Posted on: 05/26/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story No further replies to this post will be accepted.

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

If only big truck companies used the highway...  welcome to hell | 05/18/06
Monopoly remedy  OhMyGosh | 05/18/06
it ain't an idea  Spicoli the Cannoli | 05/18/06
Standard Oil didn't buy the railroads.  Anton Philidor | 05/19/06
You are right. They didn't buy railroads.  welcome to hell | 05/20/06
As a capitalist...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/18/06
WiMax exceeds expectation  Anton Philidor | 05/19/06
Except that.....  aemc | 05/19/06
You dont want net neutrality...  osreinstall | 05/18/06
Horsepuckies...  BitTwiddler | 05/19/06
So you oppose "net neutrality".  Anton Philidor | 05/19/06
Re: So you oppose "net neutrality".  none none | 05/19/06
Not at all.  osreinstall | 05/19/06
Re: Not at all.  none none | 05/19/06
Bandwidth hogs would oppose a meter  osreinstall | 05/19/06
Re: Bandwidth hogs would oppose a meter  none none | 05/19/06
They would and so would a lot of other people.  osreinstall | 05/19/06
Yes I do. It guarantees a fat pipeline for all.  welcome to hell | 05/20/06
That is like No-Fault insurance  osreinstall | 05/20/06
How is it "no-fault" if you pay based on use?  welcome to hell | 05/22/06
Net Neutrality is forced fairness which isn't.  osreinstall | 05/22/06
Call it whatever you like. It's fair.  welcome to hell | 05/22/06
You wear out the equipment, you pay for it.  osreinstall | 05/23/06
RE:You wear out the equipment, you pay for it.  welcome to hell | 05/24/06
Companies do have a limit. It just isn't posted.  osreinstall | 05/25/06
Re:Companies do have a limit.  welcome to hell | 05/25/06
Net Neutrality would not allow them.  osreinstall | 05/25/06
RE:Net Neutrality would not allow them.  welcome to hell | 05/26/06
Plenty of poor folks would use the slow lane.  osreinstall | 05/27/06
Useless.  systemcleaner | 05/19/06
think of the children!!!  csa0307 | 05/19/06
Ha  petemitchell | 05/19/06
Contact your congress persons  petemitchell | 05/19/06
The issue is only and exactly: Who pays.  Anton Philidor | 05/19/06
Everybody already pays.  johndoe445566 | 05/19/06
Capacity in addition to current.  Anton Philidor | 05/19/06
Re: The issue is only and exactly: Who pays.  none none | 05/19/06
Metering is fairer  Knorthern Knight | 05/20/06
Correct me if I'm wrong...  rapson | 05/19/06
Hey Telcos!  SysTech42 | 05/19/06
How about having the speed available...  Anton Philidor | 05/19/06
That's what you have now.  welcome to hell | 05/20/06
One thign that bothers me  aemc | 05/19/06
RE: Politicos propose new action on Net neutrality  zebedeedee | 11/26/07

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement

Meet Doc