Posted on 12/03/2010 5:25:50 AM PST by harygarfield
I'm writing this article in defense of everyone who gets or shares information over the internet. On December 21st of this year the FCC will be voting on net neutrality. When I first started researching the subject I thought it was an OK idea, not something that would harm people, but as I dug father I began to see the real danger. If you look at this subject with an open mind you'll see that it's actually a Socialist agenda to control what we see and create absolutely no competition.
(Excerpt) Read more at hegrins.blogspot.com ...
I think this is all bad news. Some people have warned that certain organizations would side step Congress and use other means to complete their goals. I think that the Aspen Institute may be a dangerous organization to those who like to get alternative news that gives alternative, non mainstream, ideas. This will be a slow process hopefully, but my 16 month old son will be being educated in school about digital literacy, how to discern truth, and how to use search terms. Considering I don't agree with the views of most educated professionals because of the indoctrination that happens in college, I'm going to have to work even harder to keep my son's mind open to all ideas. The scary part of this is it will be a generational indoctrination that may never be broken. As we saw in the 60's and 70's, those hippies or long hairs are today's leaders and educators.
Whatever the libtards call something, it is designed to accomplish the exact opposite.
Lie #1. Net neutrality does not address the tiered bandwidth structure of ISPs. TWC currently gives Roadrunner lite, regular and turbo for consumers, and no proposed net neutrality rules affect that. It would affect TWC hindering Netflix over any of those tiers because it competes with their cable offerings.
Some will say this is an invasion of privacy
Lie #2. It's not about privacy. It's about the fact that Comcast interfered with net traffic, specifically sending TCP reset packets to screw with connections. It is especially bad that Comcast did this without letting their contracted customers know. Allowances for reasonable network management, as the author describes, are included in the FCC regs and proposed net neutrality bill. There are some extreme people on the net neutrality issue who want no network management, but nobody in government is taking them seriously.
Lie #3. From here on the author digresses into the strawman of fairness doctrine proposals. Nothing like fairness doctrine has been in any proposed net neutrality regs or bills. It is a separate issue.
Each time Cox cable ups their Internet speed, I notice the latency for web connections increases, too.
They giveth with one perk and taketh using another gimmick.
The latency this morning is 209ms. It should be under 60ms, but seldom is. Many times it will be more than 400ms.
==
I’m not sure who I trust less, the FCC or the cable Internet providers.
Latency to where? If you’re getting that latency with speedtest.net to a nearby test site, I’d complain. That’s not acceptable. Roadrunner gives me 25ms to about a hundred miles away. In any case, that’s just a performance issue with your service, nothing to do with net neutrality if you get high ping times in general.
In the early summer, I had a technician come out. He said the problem was with the summer heat (duh!). He readjusted something. It helped some.
I asked him about the latency problem. His response:
That is the level of support I get from Cox Cable technicians.
Just ... wow. I'd be screaming my way up the customer support chain by now. Tell them you're into online gaming and you can't do it with such high ping times.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.