Net Neutrality
Tim Bermers-Lee, blogs on the importance of net neutrality.
If you are wondering why we should listen to him, well not many people can start a blog entry with:
“When I invented the Web …”
No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)
Tags: Internet
June 23rd, 2006 at 10:10 am
not many people can start a blog entry with:
“When I invented the Web …”
…other than Al Gore, of course.
Cheap shot, noddy.
Cringley has a good analysis of Net Neutrality, what it is and what it is not. If you scroll past his reasons why the entrie MS senior management should resign…
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20060615.html
June 23rd, 2006 at 11:44 am
There’s some good stuff being written about this at the moment – I think it might actually be helping us all understand what the Internet really is. These guys are really onto something:
http://dpsproject.com/
They focus on neutrality at the IP layer – ie, if you don’t run routers that treat all packets equally, independent of applications, it isn’t the Internet and you shouldn’t be able to call it that. It seems to resolve some of the problems with regulating Net neutrality at the application layer.
Found it in this Slashdot thread, where libertarian/market arguments are quite well addressed:
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/06/20/188214
Cheers,
RB
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:27 pm
Nuetral, just like the rest of the “media”?
Well actually, private company owners run most of the rest of it. In most one paper cities, this results in a right wing bias in editorial policy (most clearly on economic matters), whatever the mainstream tone balance of the reporting and commenting. Though there are exceptions, when rich liberals in the USA want to buy some balance, as they also do in election funding (a place where all are equal in their voting, if not in ability to campaign).
Only in multi-paper markets, is there profit motive enough for an alternative line from private media (in old fashioned language “breaking class ranks” but for the the “right” response to incentive reasons).
On line print media feedback is growing worldwide (I must have read that somwhere), this allows us to join debates around the world (with Americans on foreign and domestic policy) with those of the UK, with those of Israel and perhaps even here one day (frankly I stopped buying or reading the Herald when they put on on-line charges, probably because I found it obnoxious after better experiences around the world – one cannot dignify Stuff as an on-line forum site label).
This is probably in response to message boards and blogs and the attention of the more commercially motivated, that any consumer market has a value, one that can be sold to someone.
Like many other areas, there is the idea of network and services division. Fair and equal access to the network and some sense of allowance of competition from that is a market regime. What then is network management of the internet?
June 23rd, 2006 at 5:43 pm
Relatively non-verbal.. isn’t he?
June 24th, 2006 at 12:55 am
SPC most major ewspapers have a distinct left wing bias. eg. New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, and closer to home the NZ Herald or Sydney Morning Herald – all very left wing papers.
It would be far more accurate to describe a conservative paper, if one existed, as “breaking class ranks”.
June 24th, 2006 at 2:07 am
SPC = pompous AND illiterate
June 24th, 2006 at 9:12 am
The issue is not really what it is but what the politicians are currently looking at. Right now.
June 24th, 2006 at 9:31 am
What concerns me is that you can spell Berners-Lee’s name wrong and no one – neutral or not – picks you up.
June 24th, 2006 at 9:21 pm
El Diablo
I said it of one newspaper cities. I do not think London Paris, New York and Los Angeles are that.
It is however notable, that the more liberal (not to be confused with left wing)
of them are their greatest papers.
Sydney has more than one paper available each day for the public (Australian etc).
As for calling the Herald left wing (how long would Garth George lasted with a left wing newspaper).
Can you name one newspaper in Auckland Wellington Christchurch and Dunedin which takes Labour’s and not Nationals’ side on tax cuts? Of course not. Now why is that?
And note I was referring to the editorial bias, not the more mainstream reporting/commenting.
PS Whats the defintion of an illiterate reactionary? (apart from an editorial writer who censors letters to the editor in response, they don’t hear what they read, even though their lips are moving).
June 12th, 2007 at 9:30 am
ehokvd hpfzubwst tkzb rigyu rbys tfboswni jamsb
June 12th, 2007 at 9:31 am
ehokvd hpfzubwst tkzb rigyu rbys tfboswni jamsb