Google/Verizon

PhotoDavid78

So, with Google and Verizon announcing that they are ending net-neutrality, how might this impact SmugMug? Below are links to the articles I am referring to.

http://mashable.com/2010/08/09/google-verizon-policy-proposal/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/craig-aaron/google-verizon-pact-it-ge_b_676194.html

Ric Grupe

A rather vague question...that reqiures me to read articles.

What is it? How do you think it might impact this community?

BTW, I just started reading about this on Engadget...and quit...because it didn't mean anything to me...I think!

PhotoDavid78

well, they could start charging larger companies for faster websites. Instead of all websites being equal as they are now, it would allow a large company such as the New York Times to have fast website because they could pay for it while a smaller company would be stuck with a smaller bandwidth. Also, the internet service providers could pick applications they feel they don't want to carry and eliminate them.

So my question is, how would this effect SmugMug? would prices go up to cover higher charges by ISPs? I guess I'm asking the smugmug people themselves, not the community as a whole.

For me, this is an interesting article, if you don't have any interest and it didn't mean anything to you then why did you even bother to post a reply?

Ric Grupe

dtw78 wrote: »

well, they could start charging larger companies for faster websites. Instead of all websites being equal as they are now, it would allow a large company such as the New York Times to have fast website because they could pay for it while a smaller company would be stuck with a smaller bandwidth. Also, the internet service providers could pick applications they feel they don't want to carry and eliminate them.

So my question is, how would this effect SmugMug? would prices go up to cover higher charges by ISPs? I guess I'm asking the smugmug people themselves, not the community as a whole.

For me, this is an interesting article, if you don't have any interest and it didn't mean anything to you then why did you even bother to post a reply?

Obviously, I am interested. Now because you took the time to explain it instead of just providing links, others may be interested also...that's why.

gecko0

It will be interesting to see if/how this ends up in real life, versus paper policy. I'm all for people paying for what they use vs. an open-ended architecture. Businesses now pay for various connectivity levels, so I don't know how much this would change. If SmugMug is paying for OC-48 pipes , then they are already paying huge amounts for bandwidth. For all we know, their costs could go DOWN due to only paying for what they use, versus potential use.

I do like the intent to monitor/limit peer-to-peer and torrent use as well. People can scream and yell about their rights and net neutrality, but if you can tell me that those individuals downloading 40GB+ per day...every day... via https while connected to Astraweb/GigaNews or similar are legitimate downloads and not copyrighted material, then I'll eat my 7D on youtube. This would free up congestion that would allow legitimate, beneficial services and features to be added for everyone.

Ric Grupe

gecko0 wrote: »

I do like the intent to monitor/limit peer-to-peer and torrent use as well. People can scream and yell about their rights and net neutrality, but if you can tell me that those individuals downloading 40GB+ per day...every day... via https while connected to Astraweb/GigaNews or similar are legitimate downloads and not copyrighted material, then I'll eat my 7D on youtube. This would free up congestion that would allow legitimate, beneficial services and features to be added for everyone.

I remember when I was dowloading MP3s like crazy...just because I could. Now most of that stuff is sitting on a HD somewhere all but forgotten. I find that if I buy what I really want...I'm ahead of the game by not wasting my time...taking the chances on viral infection and getting excellent quality.

My point here is that all that bandwidth is just really being wasted to serve no purpose.

peestandingup

It basically means wireless companies like Verizon know that their networks are probably the future of how we all "get online", so they are trying to make it to where they can say what comes down their pipes & what can't. It's proprietary internet basically (think America Online) instead of the wide-open internet we know today. So yeah, it sucks.

But "wired" internet (like what you have at home) they are wanting to leave open (so they look like good guys, wow thanks). So really if something like this goes through, the only thing that can really save us is if personal WiFi routers & devices get so good that we can remain on our own WiFi network, even when we leave the house.

Thats the way I interpret this anyways. I've read a lot about it though & that seems to be pretty accurate.

Ric Grupe

FCC Commissioner Michael J. Copps:

"Some will claim this announcement moves the discussion forward. That's one of its many problems. It is time to move a decision forward-a decision to reassert FCC authority over broadband telecommunications, to guarantee an open Internet now and forever, and to put the interests of consumers in front of the interests of giant corporations."

Ric Grupe

How the Google/Verizon proposal could kill the internet in 5 years

PhotoDavid78

Ric Grupe wrote: »

How the Google/Verizon proposal could kill the internet in 5 years

you expect me to click on a link and read it?

peestandingup

dtw78 wrote: »

you expect me to click on a link and read it?

It's basically the end of mankind as we know it. Mass histeria, human sacrifice, dogs & cats living together, etc. Real biblical doomsday stuff.

Nah, it's a good read though. Hopefully someone puts a stop to it. I know first hand Verizon is an underhanded corp, but kinda upset with Google that they'd go along with this. Time to delete my Gmail I guess & use Bing for my searches/maps. Oh well.

PhotoDavid78

peestandingup wrote: »

It's basically the end of mankind as we know it. Mass histeria, dogs & cats living together, etc. Real biblical doomsday stuff.

Nah, it's a good read though. Hopefully someone puts a stop to it. I know first hand Verizon is an underhanded corp, but kinda upset with Google that they'd go along with this. Time to delete my Gmail I guess & use Bing for my searches/maps. Oh well.

Yes I read it, i'm just joking with Ric since he criticized me for posting a link earlier in the thread.

Ric Grupe

dtw78 wrote: »

you expect me to click on a link and read it?

Ric Grupe

peestandingup wrote: »

Hopefully someone puts a stop to it. I know first hand Verizon is an underhanded corp, but kinda upset with Google that they'd go along with this. Time to delete my Gmail I guess & use Bing for my searches/maps. Oh well.

The FCC will make the determination on this. Google is just trying to remain pertinent. Verizon (my carrier) is the worst when it comes to business practices. They are just plain crooks...the way of the world, I guess.

peestandingup

Ric Grupe wrote: »

The FCC will make the determination on this. Google is just trying to remain pertinent. Verizon (my carrier) is the worst when it comes to business practices. They are just plain crooks...the way of the world, I guess.

Tell me about it. I signed up my service right before they made that huge increase in their early termination fee & ended up canceling a few months down the road. Guess what? they hit me with the new fee. Even though I had the contract that said specifically that it was to be the old fee if canceled. They didnt wanna hear it, and I'm not paying them either. I refuse. So guess who gets their credit screwed because they wont honor their own contract.

Yeah, they're pretty much the worst ever.