re: Net Neutrality People Have Convinced Me

quote:

---

Your analogy is bad.

---

quote:

---

It's more like, Netflix built their own warehouse near one of the toll booths of the city's loop because they didn't want to pay the fees to the warehouses like every other business that has to ship products. 

---

quote:

---

Netflix's business has blossomed and demand for their product has skyrocketed and the traffic at their toll has too. Instead of paying other warehouses around the loop to ship from, building more of their own warehouses at different locations, or paying the city more to add more lanes, they've decided to just let it ride and convince their costumers that it's the city's fault for the slowdown.

---

quote:

---

After reading all of that, it boils down to who should pay for the upgrades to the system in order to handle the strain that large streams of info put on it. 

---

quote:

---

I think the free market should decide.

---

quote:

---

If you really think this, you have no idea what you're asking for. That "whining" is the sound of people trying to protect you (and everyone else) and your rights. But, hey, why don't you go ahead and pay your ISP an extra $50 per month just 'cause.

---

quote:

---

Whining is whining. NN hasn't protected me from anything. My rights haven't changed. The censorship problems have gotten worse in fact. But, that's not related to any right. We just need the free market to create alternatives to facebook google reddit and twitter and amazon etc.

---

quote:

---

Look this negative scenario everyone is creating won't come to pass, but its important that we give it a chance. It won't happen though, but we better make sure it could. So it won't of course.

---

quote:

---

I know you're not an idiot, but you tend to say some really stupid shite sometimes.

---

quote:

---

The set of principles that define NN are absolutely "neutral".

---

quote:

---

Why did you leave my very next sentence out of your quote? "Netflix's customers pay their ISPs to "deliver" the product." I know why,

---

quote:

---

What in the frick are you talking about? Why does a customer have to run a business in order to pay for value?

---

quote:

---

You're not making any goddamned sense, as usual

---

quote:

---

as a customer, pay my ISP for the value provided in delivering the bits that I request of a given website.

---

quote:

---

they are STEALING my money by not providing the service I've purchased.

---

quote:

---

I fail to see the contradiction you think you've spotted.

---

quote:

---

Years ago as the Internet was first becoming commercialized people realized that when you limit the distance and number of "network hops" between the server and the end user, the IP packets travel faster through the network. Fewer packets are lost or dropped and they tend to arrive in order on time. This not only speeds up the time it takes to download a web page, but it also improves the quality of video or audio that's being streamed.

Content companies building businesses and services online recognized this speed advantage, and they began working with companies that specialized in building servers all over the Internet that would store or cache popular information closer to where customers would access it. Companies like Akamai and Limelight pioneered what's become known as the content delivery network or CDN business. These companies specialized in building these networks, which if you think of the highway analogy I used before acted as a network of warehouses that were used to store the content closer to end users.

But in order to deliver the goods to end users, these companies still needed access to the roads or transit networks that would carry the packets to their destination. And in order to deliver their packets of content to end users, they would have to pay the owners of those networks -- that is, broadband providers like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T.

In turn, companies, like Netflix, which have large amounts of content to distribute and want to ensure better quality of service for their consumers, contracted with CDNs, like Akamai, to deliver that content more efficiently. In those days, the cost of paying for transit over long distances was also quite expensive, which also factored into the business calculus of paying a CDN to act as a middleman and store content closer to consumers.

This is how the Internet has worked for more than a decade.

Meanwhile, there is another set of players, which I alluded to above. These players are called transit providers. These are companies, like Level 3 and Cogent as well as big telecom giants, like AT&T and Verizon, that have built networks or backbones that span continents. These companies carry all kinds of traffic and transport it to its final destination. Because it's impossible to build networks in every corner of the world, they have to hand off traffic to other providers, until the IP packets they're transporting ultimately reach their destinations.

This handoff of traffic is what's known as "interconnection" or "peering." In a "settlement-free peering" relationship, network operators simply swap equal amounts of traffic with one another without every exchanging payment.

But sometimes the balance of traffic is not equal. In that case, the companies enter into interconnection agreements where the network operator that is delivering more traffic than it accepts pays the network operator. These arrangements can be between two backbone providers or they can occur between backbone and last-mile broadband providers. Most of the time these are private deals between companies. And the public knows very little about the details of the arrangements.

---

quote:

---

You don't have a clue how the internet works do you.

---