Net neutrality from the trenches (and dominoes in Cyrodiil)

Once upon a time in the land of IT Blogwatch, we look at Net Neutrality... again. Not to mention using the RPG, The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, to set up a domino fall...

Net neutrality is top of mind again, thanks to the founder of the Web. Bruce Stewart tells us, "Tim Berners-Lee ... continues to stand up for the principles espoused by the Net Neutrality crowd. In a BBC article published yesterday, Berners-Lee warns of a possible 'dark period on the net' if U.S. network providers succeed in creating a tiered Internet ... Berners-Lee has been speaking out for Net Neutrality for awhile now, but I find it very interesting that this latest article seems to be getting a lot of attention ... The debate around Net Neutrality is clearly expanding and it will be interesting to watch as the issue continues to garner more mainstream attention."

» Alex Barnett adds his views: "I've stayed out of the discussion so far, not due to apathy, but because the idea of a 2-tiered internet is such a bad idea that I really couldn't believe it would be taken seriously. But apparently it is ... I think most of the downsides are pretty obvious. However, in case the penny hasn't dropped for you, here's a quick (anonymous) anecdote.. Last week I met with some folks from a very, very large 'financial institution'. We got on the subject of the 2-tier internet and their position on the matter was very clear. Basically they realized that a rich man's Net and a poor man's Net would mean only one thing for the rich guys: higher prices ... They calculated that an increase of 20% for 'premium packets' would mean literally adding tens of millions of dollars to their internet connectivity bill for their global operations. Once the penny dropped they joined the lobbying effort against the bill."

» Paul Kapustka: "When the telcos argue against network neutrality, one central theme is that without tiered pricing plans, they won't be able to 'recoup their investment' in all these great new services they plan to build. The question to ask is, from where will that 'recouping' come? The answer can be found in your wallet ... The battle is not (as the telcos want you to believe) between them and the Googles of the world, but between telcos and customers -- with customers the ones who will have to pay the freight for the telcos' new shiny networks ... just like cable, the telcos are going to have to PAY EXTRA to host specialized content. Just like cablecos pay ESPN a few bucks per customer, so will phone companies have to pay for their content ... a mildly interesting 'debate' on the topic online today at the Wall Street Journal, Craig Newmark and Mike McCurry trade jabs ... For its part, Google will keep spending upon the millions it already invests in backbone infrastructure to ensure that its services work well over the regular Internet."

» Alan Herrell: "This debate revolves around the proposition put forth by the Telcos, that we are running out of capacity, and they need to build out new infrastructure. Metered Infrastructure ... I met a fellow web designer the other day and we were discussing web design stuff, and the talk turned to the Network Neutrality Debate. Her final answer was 'Show Me the Money' ... Allegedly, they spent millions on running optical fiber, to increase capacity in the late 90's and early 00's. The only indication of this activity was the round robin selling of 'capacity' to each other ... Show me this fiber, and it's capacity, and prove you need more money. Once you have done this, why don't you do what every other business on the planet does, which is to go to the capital markets and get investors, issue bonds, or even sell stock, like every other publicly traded company on the planet."

» Brad Waller sums up the debate: "It is amazing to read some of McCurry's points. It sounds like he supports Net Neutrality when he says 'let the current rules govern,' and then asks 'Is there a real problem now with discrimination on the Net?' How can he ask that? Of course there is no problem now. We have neutrality! ... Craig Newmark is an engineer, and he says he talks to a lot of employees at these same companies that claim that there is a coming bandwidth crunch. He says that there is a lot of unused capacity, but the real problem is sluggish adoption of IPv6 which is required for future growth."

Buffer overflow:

    Around the Net

• Sophos: Oracle posts more critical updates
• Ryan Paul: MIT's US$100 laptop prototype completed
• Jeremy Reimer: Microsoft considers removing Admin access for employees
• Jim Forbes: Apple Gets an A OK from Consumer Reports for Support
• Nicholas Carr: The death of Wikipedia
• Philip Letts:  Ooops, Vonage shares dip in first day as public company
• Rebecca Herold: Reference For Protecting Portable Data

    Around Computerworld

• Jeff Boles: Whatever happened to the CRM of yesterday? Are you ready for a comeback?
• Alex Scoble: Sony to prohibit sale of used PS3 games?
• Computerworld TechCast: Enterprise Information Integration
• Lucas Mearian: The VA can hardly afford this black eye
• Martin McKeay: The best way to deal with spammers!
• Shark Tank: Don't know if he passed, but we know who failed

And finally... TES4:Oblivion domino fall [someone has too much time on their hands?]

Richi Jennings is an independent technology and marketing consultant, specializing in email, blogging, Linux, and computer security. A 20 year, cross-functional IT veteran, he is also an analyst at Ferris Research. Contact Richi at blogwatch@richi.co.uk. Also contributing to today's post: Judi Dey, our very own Antipodean.