Skip to main content

View Diary: The Internet is already not net neutral (61 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Very informative diary (14+ / 0-)

    Is there a country that has true "net neutrality"?

    Is there a country where the "back bone" is controlled by politics?

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Fri May 16, 2014 at 06:19:05 PM PDT

    •  Not that I know (5+ / 0-)

      But I might move to it.

      Many an insightful opinion and observation can be found on my blog Occam's Razor. UID: 875

      by Guy Noir on Fri May 16, 2014 at 06:27:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  This was going to be my first question. (6+ / 0-)

      Aren't companies charging different rates now. THANK YOU FOR THIS DAIRY!!!!.

      •  As a customer, I get a multi-tier plan for (7+ / 0-)

        receiving my internet coverage, from .5 to 5 mb/s.  Yes I have the fastest plan my wire will hold.  If they had fiber in my neighborhood, I could get up to 40 mb/s.  

        And they won't, as there is NO incentive to put the bigger pipe in.  They won't do a thing until the whole thing breaks down and everyone jumps ship to a new provider.

        "Death is the winner in any war." - Nightwish/Imaginareum/Song of myself.

        by doingbusinessas on Fri May 16, 2014 at 10:04:20 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Check out Chattanooga. (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Wee Mama, StrayCat, rduran, Shockwave

          Our town, which is not Chattanooga, bought itself a $14,000,000 workout building.

          For $1,400,000 surely we could have put in Chatty's 1-gig Internet service for the whole place. They charge $70/month for the gig.

          (Still, "Nice pecs !!!")

          And that's a 1-gig download speed, not a misread.

          "Stealing kids' lunch money makes them strong and independent." -- after Paul "False Prophet" Ryan

          by waterstreet2013 on Sat May 17, 2014 at 04:25:31 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I tracert in 13, in 8 hops (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      caul, Shockwave

      1 ms is .001 seconds and none of my hops to are more than  25 ms so my total wait to connect is less than 1 second. Am I really expected to pay more for a faster connection?

      Would I win more tank battles if my frames per second went up from 30 to 300 fps? I don't think my eye can process that fast.

      What happens with wireless connections in cities, does your cell phone just grab the closest repeater and then does it depend on what the repeater has for a mux, or whether its using digital demultiplexing or a pdr?

      Do we see all those hops because providers are using chained mux's

      "la vida no vale nada un lugar solita" "The Limits of Control Jim Jarmusch

      by rktect on Sat May 17, 2014 at 01:28:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm no expert (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Shockwave, Gay CA Democrat

        But I do know enough about digital technology to guess that the differences in effective speeds are caused by many factors and not just a subscriber's access speed to the nearest ISP server, but also how many nodes packets have to go through to reach the servers of the web sites they're using in BOTH directions, the quality of the routers and servers at each node in terms of processing power, buffer capacity and speed, how much traffic they're each handling, etc. There's also the time it takes for one's browser to render each page or frame, which is also dependent on the device it's running on, etc.

        The down/up speeds we're supposed to get from our ISPs (and that providers are supposed to get on their end, which are obviously orders of magnitude higher than what we get) represent ideal maximums, and are not indicative of actual or effective speeds, which are constantly varying and far lower. The important thing about net neutrality is that everyone, on the subscriber and provider end, must be guaranteed a certain minimum average speed that more than meets certain reasonable speeds necessary for meaningful internet use.

        "Reagan's dead, and he was a lousy president" -- Keith Olbermann 4/22/09

        by kovie on Sat May 17, 2014 at 06:37:29 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Sorry for the late reply (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          I didn't realize the diary got into the community showcase.

          Each router decides which next router should get the packet of data, based on its measure of traffic at the time. It works out pretty well overall. Network engineers at places like Google make sure their hosting centers and network connections are close to prominent ISPs. That takes research and money, which gives them a competitive advantage.

          Many an insightful opinion and observation can be found on my blog Occam's Razor. UID: 875

          by Guy Noir on Sat May 17, 2014 at 06:04:20 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Would it be possible (0+ / 0-)

            to develop an internet optimization process whereby network traffic analysis servers would continually monitor network traffic patterns and let routers that are capable of receiving and handling such information know where to send incoming packets, with these same routers being the source of traffic pattern information that these servers use? It would help these routers make smarter guesses since they can't otherwise know what things are like downstream.

            Undoubtedly someone's thought of this already, perhaps on a more ad hoc level, such that the network WAS the server, with the proper software.

            "Reagan's dead, and he was a lousy president" -- Keith Olbermann 4/22/09

            by kovie on Sat May 17, 2014 at 09:19:18 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site