Net-Neutrality: wtf is it?

[Vergil83]

(There is a reason this is not happening.)

Why do you think that is?

[CodeRoot]

Why do you think that is?

Weelll... I thought it was pretty obvious...

It is in the nature of man to be selfish --- As long as Google (or anything else, or any company, or ...) does for them what they want it to, people will tend to continue [without change]. Something has to "hit really close to home" before most people will make a "moral" decision that will cause them to change their habits -- which, in of itself, is an indication that their "moral standard" is low...

[techieMoe]

What about the choice of the journalists that yahoo helped get sent to jail? I hope people at yahoo have such flexible ideas of right and wrong to be able sleep at night.

Don't get me wrong; I don't like what's happening in China any more than anyone else. I'm simply tired of people blaming companies like Google for the state of the country.

Google CLAIMS they are moral (or try), as in their motto "Don't be evil.".

Again, I don't accept your statement of universal morality. What's "evil"? Is there a globally-accepted standard for that? An awful lot of militant Muslims think my country and faith are evil. I consider leaders like Kim Jong Il to be evil. It was long considered that people who were left-handed (like myself) were evil. Evil, I say again, is relative, as is morality. Can you honestly even attempt to prove that Google's actions are immoral when morality and evil are intangible concepts?

[zeroth404]

It is in the nature of man to be selfish

freedom of information and unlimited and unrestricted access to it is not selfishness. It's mandatory for our intellectual and technological evolution.

How about I start charging you for library access?

hoiw about I start charging you for every page you read of a book you own?

The only thing this will help is the Pockets of our ISPs. THAT is greed.

[fingal]

Moe's post reminded me of a Taoist story. Once there was a farmer living in a distant province in China, and he had a son: an only child.

One day the son decided to try capturing one of the many wild horses which roamed the countryside in that province, and he succeeded in capturing the wildest and the finest of them all. He took it back to the farm and the neighbours gathered around.

"What good luck!" said the farmer's neighbours.
"How do you know?" asked the farmer.

One day the son decided to ride this fine unbroken horse (without a saddle: how daring!) and in doing so he fell off and broke his arm.

"What bad luck!" said the farmer's neighbours.
"How do you know?" asked the farmer.

So the next day, the Imperial Army rode through the farmer's land recruiting conscripts for a particularly bloody and unsuccessful campaign. But they couldn't recruit the farmer's son because he had a broken arm.

"What good luck!" said the farmer's neighbours.
"How do you know?" asked the farmer.

And the next day ...

freedom of information and unlimited and unrestricted access to it is not selfishness. It's mandatory for our intellectual and technological evolution.

How about I start charging you for library access?

hoiw about I start charging you for every page you read of a book you own?

The only thing this will help is the Pockets of our ISPs. THAT is greed.

Bless you to pieces! (I'm a librarian). Have you ever read Stallman's 'The Right to Read'?

[zeroth404]

Have you ever read Stallman's 'The Right to Read'?

Just did.



Forgive me for this ririculous analogy I myself hate it, but: I don't want to see any toll bridges on the information superhighway....

but I also don't want the government to regulate anything at all.

I want freedom. true freedom. the problem here is that we have to choose our master: the government, or the ISPs. We don't need one at all.

and damnit, the government is supposed to repreent us, not Dictate us.

[ImNeat]

I agree there are no moral truths; however, I do believe companies like Google should practice decent business ethics when making decisions like this net-neutrality one. In our country we are so used to businesses ramming us in the behind that it has become completely natural to us.

I need to read into the situation more - but from my understanding 'they' are trying to take something free that isn't broken... only to break it and charge for it. Not cool.

[techieMoe]

but I also don't want the government to regulate anything at all.

I want freedom. true freedom. the problem here is that we have to choose our master: the government, or the ISPs. We don't need one at all.

I completely disagree. Human beings are incapable of handling ourselves in such a manner that would negate the need for some form of government. Our history has shown this in grand, embarassing detail. What you seem to want is anarchy in its purest form, which will never work with humans.

[ImNeat]

What you seem to want is anarchy in its purest form, which will never work with humans.

I disagree - a tribe is to the human as a pack is to the wolf or a school is to the fish. None of these mirror any form of goverment created since civilization. Anarchy is the only natural form of government. Sure we couldn't maintain this way of life with anarchy but that doesn't mean it will never work for humans. It did for nearly 200,000 years.

[Cabhan]

In a tribe, you do not have anarchy: your system of government is simply smaller. Presumably there is still some organization wherein those who wrong the tribe are punished by the collective, and there are rules for the tribe, if less formal and codified than in modern human government.

And I think the real problem is not in having government, but rather in having idiots in government (and this is not only address America). I know there are people out there who would not give into corruption and who have knowledge in all sorts of fields, but are therefore too smart to want to be in politics .


But in regards to the situation at large, what it comes down to is that ISPs are claiming that because their service connects us to the Internet, they may aversely affect or entirely shut out connections that they don't wish to allow. This must not be allowed. Unfortunately, because Google has come out as being very much FOR net neutrality, it is being accused of having its own interests in mind.

As far as the China thing goes: the Chinese government is despicable. Blame them. For some reason, I don't see how Google saying "No! NO GOOGLE FOR YOU!" forcing a more humanitarian government to take power. This is not exactly like Google is providing arms to Sudanese child kidnappers.