Good evening. In case you missed it, I weighed in with great detail on the Level 3/Comcast/Netflix flap, getting down to the basics to unravel the issue technically.
But tonight we discuss Net Neutrality. House Republican Reps. Cliff Stearns and Joe Barton fired a warning shot, challenging the FCC to justify any action it takes this month, so now that’s an issue getting some attention. ISPs are already scoffing at one proposed legal avenue because it’s ridiculous. Net Neutrality has zero to do with deploying high speed Internet access, and in fact such regulations would likely hinder deployment. Even left-wing universal access folk have been saying that for ages.
I guess it’s a good thing various big names turned down stimulus bucks for deployment.
Continue reading »
Just as I was saying copyright was soon to replace Net Neutrality as the big tech issue of the moment, circumstances prove me wrong. Instead, regardless of the results of the December FCC meeting and the future of that whole Net Neutrality debate (more later), the coming issue now is going to be peering.
Some will play word games and say it’s all covered under the blanket issue of Net Neutrality, but be careful. Net Neutrality as promoted and sold by Free Press, the FCC, Google, Verizon, and others has been all about the so-called last mile from the Internet to your home or business, including wired and wireless access. That’s what the FCC is talking about regulating as Net Neutrality, that’s been the focus of the scare stories calling the need for Net Neutrality a Crisis™, and we cannot now let them do a bait and switch.
So in your mind, I suggest separating the Comcast/Level 3/Netflix issue from the Free Press/Net Neutrality issue. The former deals with the back end of the Internet, from the user’s perspective, while the latter deals with the front end that we directly pay for and use.
They’re both important though, so here’s my explanation and view of the Comcast/Level 3 Peering controversy broken out as a separate post because it got so long. To sum it up, Comcast did the right thing, because Netflix and Level 3 were being unfair and trying to take advantage of sharing deals made in good faith.
Continue reading »
There’s a lot of heat and unfortunately not enough light being produced online with respect to the recent decision by Comcast to cut off its free peering deal with Level 3, thanks to the throwing around of the name Netflix. People like Netflix and want to know what’s going on. I even have a Netflix streaming-only account. So I’ll try to explain here what’s going on, why it matters, and why we need to keep the government from intervening in favor of Level 3 and Netflix.
Firstly, I know what the question is that many will need answered: What is peering? To understand what peering is, we must first remember that the Internet is a series of networks. We all have our networks at our homes and businesses. Those networks connect to ISPs. Those ISPs then connect their networks to each other and to ‘backbone’ providers. Those backbone providers also connect to each other. The further along the chain we go, the more of the Internet’s functioning depends on those connections. Backbone providers would not have a useful service unless their networks gave access to the entire Internet.
So what the big boys do is create peering agreements with each other, where they agree to connect to each other for free, on the grounds that the data will travel both ways, benefit both sides, and create value for all involved. Firms have to be careful though to ensure that their peers are actually trading equally and fairly, creating benefit for all instead of just leeching. That is why ISPs make contracts that specify how the peerings work, and document their policies and practices of peering. Level 3 spells it out and so does Comcast.
So what happened that was the big deal?
Continue reading »
Hello! The big story that we’ve been following with Tech at Night since the beginning has been Net Neutrality, but right now we’re still stuck waiting on this issue. Republicans aren’t going to act on it until January at the earliest, and we aren’t going to know what (if anything) the FCC will do on the issue in December until they tell us. So we wait, spread the word on why it’s not needed, and of course get loud against the radicals.
So until then, we return to what was once the big tech issue, and what might again become the big tech issue: Copyright.
Continue reading »
Happy Thanksgiving. I’ll be very brief, because it’s Thanksgiving.
The FCC is going to vote on the Internet takeover next month. Defying the law and the courts, the FCC will make a power grab, or at least will try to. There’s still time to get loud, get people informed, and get enough popular opposition to this thing going that the FCC might back off. I’m not counting on it, so plan B becomes aggressive legislative action in January. So talk to your members of Congress as well.
Continue reading »
Good night/morning. Yes, the world now waits on the FCC to see whether it will act to claim broad, unprecedented regulatory powers over the Internet, the pricing of services on it, as well as the content on it. Free Press is happy, of course, because that organization’s long-term goal is the total state control of all mass media.
They recognize the FCC’s so-called Net Neutrality plans for what they are. The rest of us must recognize the same, and get loud against the FCC to make others see, as well. And then we must get Republicans in the House fired up to make refudiating the FCC’s plans a top priority come January.
Continue reading »
Good evening. I don’t know how I managed to do a Tech at Night on Friday night. Just barely I guess. Because I’ve been sick from Friday night on, though I was mostly alright today. And so we’re back in business.
And we’ll start with a note on more Internet control that the Barack Obama administration is mulling. Yes, again, the content of webpages is to be controlled under the Obama Presidency through DOJ bullying via the ADA. The fact is, if businesses are forced to make expensive changes to their websites, they may instead be forced to go out of business, killing jobs, driving innovation overseas, and creating a chilling effect across our economy.
This must not stand.
Continue reading »
Good morning. Last night Tech at Night didn’t quite come because I was not feeling well at all. But there’s stuff I want to highlight so this morning I’m going to make it happen. Here we go!
Want to be more like Europe? Well, in one way, we do: The EU has rejected Net Neutrality regulation as unnecessary. The EU’s equivalent of an FCC Chairman says “We should allow network operators and services and content providers to explore innovative business models.”
Can we actually stand to be more regulated than Europe, and drive innovation across the Atlantic? I don’t think so. We absolutely cannot tolerate proposals like this to force AT&T, Verizon, and others to open their wireless networks to each other, essentially partially nationalizing and socializing a major part of our telecommunications infrastructure going forward.
I can think of no better way to kill the wonderful wireless revolution we have going on, and end investment in it, than to turn everyone into free riders off of each other. This would devastate rural Internet access by creating a tragedy of the commons out there. We cannot let this happen.
Continue reading »
Good evening. Apologies again for missing two of three Tech at Night episodes last week. I can only plead an overabundance of desire for the weekend causing me to be forgetful on Friday. But that just means we have more to look at tonight, so let’s go.
Yes, the forces of Net Neutrality Internet regulation were beaten badly last week. How badly? We already knew that All 95 PCCC Net Neutrality Pledge signers lost, but on top of that, the PCCC itself raised only $300 on the cause. Even if every donor gave only one dollar, that’s the sign of a failing fringe movement, not a popular position with broad, bipartisan support.
Continue reading »