All programmers are playwrights and all computers are lousy actors
|
|
|
Google and Verizon want less wireless Internet protections
A TWO TIERED INTERNET with a wireless tier that has less net neutrality protection than the wireline tier is the vision that has been set forth by Google's public policy head and Verizon's public affairs chief.
In a long statement on Google's public policy blog the two companies explained their seven key elements for the Internet's future regulation. They include for wireline no discrimination and say yes to transparency and openness, but for wireless it's another kettle of fish entirely.
When data going down a cable is inevitably going to go through the air at some point, one wonders how this can work. But anyway Alan Davidson, Google director of public policy and Tom Tauke, Verizon executive vice president of public affairs, policy, and communications said in their statement, "we both recognize that wireless broadband is different from the traditional wireline world, in part because the mobile marketplace is more competitive and changing rapidly.
"In recognition of the still-nascent nature of the wireless broadband marketplace, under this proposal we would not now apply most of the wireline principles to wireless, except for the transparency requirement."
They go on to propose that the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) report to Congress annually on wireless market developments and whether consumers are protected.
So the likelihood of legislation being changed depends upon the GAO to convince Congress while the Internet and Big Media industries' lobbyists whisper in everyone's other ears. And what if this wild west approach to wireless Internet is deemed to have worked? Could wireline protections ever be rescinded?
Then there is the organisation that has to oversee all of this, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). For the FCC, Google and Verizon want it to have consumer protection and non-discrimination standards "that go beyond" what it has today.
Sounds good, but rather worse is that it would only enforce "openness policies" on a case-by-case basis, using a complaint-driven process. But who should complain and how many will need to? The penalty Google and Verizon want is $2 million for these "bad actors". Is that really enough of a deterrent? µ
Share this:
Share
You guys do understand the concept of finite bandwidth?
With copper and fiber, you can add a new line, change from 100mb to 1gb to 10gb, add new lines, segment off CMTS to add capacity, add more DSLAMs to support more customers.
With wireless, particularly the licensed bands, you can't just use more frequency bandwidth. You have what you paid *a lot* for.
Peer to peer, Netflix and Hulu are the biggest bandwidth users by far. Throw that in with smartphones and Verizon's shiny new tower is out of capacity with probably under 50 customers.
Everyone wants quality of service then complains when something isn't using 100% download speed 100% of the time.
Buy a commercial account and quit complaining. Pay what the ISPs pay for dedicated bandwidth.
This is probably the green light for the next round of controlling the internet. Since the link has typical execu-babble, I doubt anyone knows what's in store.
The deception of Schmidt is unforgivable. He talks about an open "wire line" internet deliberately leaving the impression all is right with the internet world. Excluded from the so-called policy statement is the wireless internet which includes all mobile devices. This is the market Verizon wants to control big time. Comcast can have cable- but Verizon/Google will be stomping all over all present and future wireless internet users (4G, 3G and all future G). Come on Eric. - do you take us all for a bunch of fools?You want to keep the pristine image of Google as defenders of Net Neutrality but you are selling the future internet down the river. Such hypocrisy is unforgivable. Google has raised its true flag and it is the flag of Big Business and Corporate Control. We must all join forces and fight this destruction of internet openness. Down with Google!! We need to promote and support open source search engine development - or any service provider that truly embraces Net Neutrality and does not lie to the public like Eric Schmidt and his Google crowd. I would implore all disappointed Google employees to bail out and start planning for a time when your employment contracts will permit you to create a monster Google competitor. There is a Wiki oriented public prepared to help pay for this freedom. Lets all vow to terminate our GMAIL accounts and stop using Google software of any sort.