Net Neutrality: You need to get involved (Network World)

[John US Traffic]

I've read a number of excellent statements on this, which in my opinion is one of the most important issues of our time, and this is definitely one of the best I've ever read:

Net Neutrality: You need to get involved

I don’t care if you are the kind of person who never gets involved in politics or this kind of public discussion. Net Neutrality is one issue that you need to weigh in on now.

Network World is also an excellent site if you're not already familiar with it.

[universal4]

I have been reading Network World since they for many many years, and actually miss many of the Ziff Davis print publications, but honestly, there is very little contained within Network World that is not aimed at the tech industry and server and networking administration target.

Although there are some here involved within the tech industry, most people come here to discuss this industry, not networks, switches, servers, operating systems and administration type software which is the bulk of the articles Network World publishes.

Net netrality itself likely will never really happen, although it would be nice but the variuous governments around the world will continue to claim they want that for their citizens, while they continue to spy on them, in the interest of protecting their security.

Some countries with more oppressive governments will continue to censor content and claim it is in the interest of their residents.

In some cases the net can never be completely neutral due to costs. Someone has to pay for the cable in the ground, or to use that cable.

Should we have a net so neutral that anyone can do anything?
Should they be alowed to spam anyone, anytime they want?
Should they be allowed to run phishing scams or fraudulently pretend to be your bank? (using your bank's artwork)
Should they be allowed to run port scans, hack attempts and hack your websites?

True net neutrality would allow those problems to increase and get out of hand. (and many of them are already serious issues)

Rick
Universal4

[Sherlock]

Net neutrality is a nice ideal like freedom or perfect competition. And like perfect competition it never existed. And every day we go towards net non-neutrality.

And like freedom is not for everyone, net neutrality is also not for everyone. It is for people who care about it.

I wish it were for everyone, but as I am getting older I somehow accept possibility that my wish is wrong. People who get many things without fight are lazy and demand even more and more, and that is the situation now, where the monopolies have so much power. It is not that the monopolies are evil, but people are lazy and will get even more lazy.

So everyone who wants to work can work nowadays and gain huge money. Everyone who really wants freedom, can have freedom. But freedom has a price and it has to be paid. We want freedom without paying for it. We hope that if we join together, we will have our own power of monopoly of 99%. I think it is evil thinking. I am glad I can use Tor, I am glad I can have servers in chaotic countries where no one cares, I am glad I have enough money to live in Latin America and bribe people here to get passport, which helps me to get out of the system.

I am even glad that the monopoly described in the article gives me the opportunity to make money on it.

The further we go from Net neutrality, the more money will be possible to make on lazy people who will want to buy their freedom. Of course they will not get it, I sell only illusion of it, but that is their problem. Anyone who wants to fight, can fight. Alone.

[Sherlock]

Should we have a net so neutral that anyone can do anything?
Should they be alowed to spam anyone, anytime they want?
Should they be allowed to run phishing scams or fraudulently pretend to be your bank? (using your bank's artwork)
Should they be allowed to run port scans, hack attempts and hack your websites?
Universal4

Actually what we are getting now and will get in the future, is the "worst" scenario, where governments and corporations will have more and more control and those quoted things will happen on even larger scale, where corporations will be also hidden part of the scam.

It is the same as with taxes, where John Doe has to pay each penny or he loses everything and the wealthy people and corporations can avoid.

It is the same as the other thread, Rick: there is big difference between what we believe ideal world is and what actually is. There is no way to stop those scams. It is up to people to live with them, like we can live with bacteria. No government will protect people against market forces and those scams have pretty big ROI. Scammers go after weak targets and the more the weak are protected the more weak they become. The old institutions cause and will cause on the internet only more disruptions. I accept it, but can not welcome it.

[universal4]

I tend to agree with a good bit of that Sherlock.

I do disagree that people should be able to do any thing they want with those servers in countries that do not care and I do think that upstream providers need to be held accountable for the activities on those servers when they affect servers or bandwith of servers based on other providers.

An example, if anyone sitting on a server in Country X tries to hack a mail server in Country Y and the server admin provides the upstream provider in Country X evidence by logs etc then that upstream provider should be forced to take action on that client. That client is attempting illegal activity as well as causing someone else additional costs in bandwith.

Upstream providers that do NOT take action should be blocked.

The use of their services should not cost anyone extra money, to fend off unwarranted and unwanted attacks.

In other words, use and pay for whatever you want, as long as that does not include reaching into my pocket. If your actions affect my wallet, I should have a way to stop that from happening, and when it comes to big bandwith pipes, someone has to be responsible

Rick
Universal4