Re: Binge On! - And So This is Net Neutrality?

[Clay Curtis <clay584 () gmail com>]

This is just the start.  Providers will push the limits slowly and will
eventually get to where they want to be.  t-mob is doing this in such a way
that consumer's will not object.  When the general public doesn't object
(because they are getting "free" data) that makes it a lot easier for the
FCC to look past the fact that this is a violation of basic net
neutrality.  Reminds me of the boiling frog analogy (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog).

Clay

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 12:46 PM, Blake Hudson <blake () ispn net> wrote:

> It's not. And that's the point.
>
> This proposal, and ones similar, stifle growth of applications. If there
> are additional (artificial) burdens for operating in a field it becomes
> harder to get into. Because it's harder to get into, fewer operators
> compete. [Note, we just reduced open competition, one tenet of Net
> Neutrality]  Because there are fewer operators there will be less
> competition. Less competition increases prices and fewer customers take the
> service. Because few people use the application, the network operator has
> no incentive to support the application well.  [Note, we just reduced the
> freedom to run applications] Because the network doesn't support the
> application well, few people use the application. It's circular and it
> slows growth.
>
> Just because there may be inherent challenges to offering an application
> (bandwidth, for example), doesn't mean that adding another one (per
> application bandwidth caps) is desirable.
>
> Josh Reynolds wrote on 11/20/2015 11:29 AM:
>
> > How much medical imaging and video conference and online backup is
> > done over cell networks? Those are very high bandwidth tasks that
> > would quickly suck up a data cap. Until LTE came along, doing that was
> > often hit/miss as far as the reliability of the connection and the
> > speed.
> >
> > In an area with LTE, there are often better connectivity options. In
> > an area without LTE, well, how much medical imaging and data backup is
> > done over those 3G and satellite connections?
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Blake Hudson <blake () ispn net> wrote:
> >
> > > Considering T-Mobile's proposal is intended to favor streaming music and
> > > video services, I think it clearly violates net neutrality which is
> > > intended
> > > to not only promote competition in existing applications, but also in new
> > > (possibly undeveloped) applications. This proposal simply entrenches
> > > streaming video/music by artificially reducing the cost to operators in
> > > these fields while leaving costs the same for operators in other fields -
> > > medical imaging, video conferencing, online backup, etc. I believe the
> > > sum
> > > affect is a reduction in competition and growth of the internet as a
> > > whole,
> > > the antithesis to the spirit of net neutrality.