Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Net Neutrality and Ham Radio  (Read 1353 times)
N9KX
Member

Posts: 2061




Ignore
« on: November 20, 2017, 02:56:05 PM »

found this article on Net Neutrality; sort of a Net Neutrality for dummies which is what i needed.   please weigh in with ways this could impact ham radio.

source: http://curiousjon.com/2017/09/net-neutrality-explained-like-a-story/

Quote
Net Neutrality Explained Like A Story

Imagine that you make a call to your favorite pizza delivery company to order a pizza. Now, imagine that the telephone company makes that call difficult through a bad connection.  So, your call to your favorite pizza place is often dropped, or its hard to hear them, or they can’t hear you, or sometimes the call just won’t go through.  So, you stop ordering from them and order from another pizza place.  When you call the other place, the phone works just fine.

Now, imagine the phone company does that on purpose because it has a deal with the other pizza company to pay more to make their calls better.  For money, the phone company makes one phone call better than another. 

In the United States, they can’t do that. The telephone company is considered a “common carrier”, so discriminating between users is illegal.  Every phone call is treated the same.

Let’s try again.

This time, imagine the same thing, only instead of using the telephone to order your pizza, you are ordering it over the Internet. When you try, you find that the website for your pizza place loads very slowly, so slowly that eventually you just give up. Instead, you go to the website of another pizza company and it loads fine, so you order from that one.  Now imagine that your favorite pizza company’s website loads slowly because your cable provider made a deal with the other pizza company to block its competitors and let only the other pizza company’s website load fast.

Net neutrality is the concept that this shouldn’t be allowed. Instead, the Internet should be treated just like a common carrier, like the phone company. Service providers should not be allowed to favor one website over another, except for limited legitimate reasons.

Some people agree with this concept and some do not.  Right now, the head of the FCC (Ajit Pai) does not, and he is trying to change the rules for the Internet so that Internet providers can favor one pizza company over the other, or decide not to allow access to one pizza company at all.

And it’s not just pizza companies.  It could apply to any organization or person, anywhere, for any reason. For instance, if a cable provider does not like a religious point of view, it could slow down that church’s website or even refuse to allow access to that website. If the Internet provider is planning to offer services itself – such as streaming movies – it could slow down competitors streaming movies to encourage you to use its own movie service.

Or, if a cable provider supports on political candidate or political position, it could slow down or block information about the other candidate or position.

The Internet is such a fundamental part of our lives today, in a free and open democracy, that we cannot allow cable providers – large corporations – to control our access to information, making choices for us. Instead, it should allow the marketplace of ideas to compete on a level playing field.

If you want to learn more about net neutrality and/or take action, here are some links:

John Oliver on Net Neutrality: https://youtu.be/92vuuZt7wak

Electronic Frontier Foundation: https://www.eff.org/issues/net-neutrality

ACLU on Net Neutrality: https://www.aclu.org/issues/free-speech/internet-speech/what-net-neutrality

Wikipedia on Net Neutrality: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality

Netflix on Net Neutrality (Forbes Magazine): http://fortune.com/2017/06/15/netflix-net-neutrality-fcc/

Google on Net Neutrality (TAKE ACTION): https://www.google.com/takeaction/action/freeandopen/index.html

Logged
AE5GT
Member

Posts: 67




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: November 21, 2017, 01:21:24 PM »

non issue.
Logged
AC7CW
Member

Posts: 1002




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: November 21, 2017, 01:27:43 PM »

Tachnology will take care of the issue? Gigabit internet is being rolled out to early adopter areas, given time it will be the standard.
Logged

Novice 1958, 20WPM Extra now... (and get off my lawn)
K5AJ
Member

Posts: 15




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: November 23, 2017, 07:35:34 AM »

Hello,
Ref: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1191516/pg9

With the end of net neutrality, and upstream providers implementation of [the absence of net neutrality],
they are anticipated to censor and block any content they please.

It would seem that ham radio becomes more important to get brief text-only messages from point A to point B, messages that would otherwise be blocked by Comcast, AT&T and others.

Hence the upstream providers become an [out of control] FCC.
Logged
AC7CW
Member

Posts: 1002




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: November 23, 2017, 09:32:05 AM »

Hello,
Ref: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1191516/pg9

With the end of net neutrality, and upstream providers implementation of [the absence of net neutrality],
they are anticipated to censor and block any content they please.

It would seem that ham radio becomes more important to get brief text-only messages from point A to point B, messages that would otherwise be blocked by Comcast, AT&T and others.

Hence the upstream providers become an [out of control] FCC.

Facebook is hugely politically biased and shuts down sites all the time. Net Neutrality won't affect that.
Logged

Novice 1958, 20WPM Extra now... (and get off my lawn)
N0NB
Member

Posts: 143


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #5 on: November 27, 2017, 07:15:30 PM »

Tachnology will take care of the issue? Gigabit internet is being rolled out to early adopter areas, given time it will be the standard.

Yeah, right.  The mighty AT&T can't bothered to run fiber anywhere but their most populous markets.  Meanwhile, I have two independent telcos within a few miles of here that have fiber to the home for all of their rural customers.  If it weren't for one of those telcos operating as a WISP and covering this area so we can get 10 Mbps unmetered, we'd be stuck with cellular or, ugh, satellite.

I don't like the ISPs monkeying with stuff one bit, but I equally distrust the government getting their hands into the Internet any more than they are.  Just like the cable TV legislation of the early '90s, the bills will rise and the service will get worse.  This is really a catch 22.
Logged

73, de Nate
Bremen, KS

SKCC 6225
NA4IT
Member

Posts: 51


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #6 on: November 28, 2017, 04:17:30 AM »

Tachnology will take care of the issue? Gigabit internet is being rolled out to early adopter areas, given time it will be the standard.

Yeah, right.  The mighty AT&T can't bothered to run fiber anywhere but their most populous markets.  Meanwhile, I have two independent telcos within a few miles of here that have fiber to the home for all of their rural customers.  If it weren't for one of those telcos operating as a WISP and covering this area so we can get 10 Mbps unmetered, we'd be stuck with cellular or, ugh, satellite.

I don't like the ISPs monkeying with stuff one bit, but I equally distrust the government getting their hands into the Internet any more than they are.  Just like the cable TV legislation of the early '90s, the bills will rise and the service will get worse.  This is really a catch 22.


Tennessee passed legislation that allows rural electric cooperatives to run fiber broadband. I'm in the boonies with only satellite Internet. The broadband os supposed to be here within 5 years.

I talked to Comcast and AT&T and asked when we might get high speed in our area. Their answer... NEVER! Seriously, the techs laughed while they said it.
Logged
KE8WO
Member

Posts: 9




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: November 28, 2017, 07:29:36 AM »

I think the Internet has been wildly successful without government control. Government control will stifle innovation and progress. The idea of paying more for improved services is not new.  An example .. I pay my local Internet / TV service provider (ISP) for Internet only service and for only a speed up to 15 or so mbs. If I wanted to pay more, then I could have a faster speed .. up to 100 mbs. Same general idea for cell phone service: how may voice minutes, texts or GB of data do you need and want to pay for. The more you need, the more you pay. In my opinion, net neutrality is a misnomer .. should be viewed as heavy handed government regulations of Internet service. I believe that we need more ISP's who are competing for our $$'s. Then we vote with our $$'s on which level or services and costs we support. Some of the existing Internet TV streaming services now have a few tiers of service and costs with variables of video bandwidth, number of simultaneous devices, etc. Again .. consumers choose.
Logged
NEVBEN
Member

Posts: 98




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: December 08, 2017, 09:59:38 AM »

People don't think this makes a difference because they don't actually try to do anything other than what they're expected to do.

Take a protocol like SMTP for example.  Simple Message Transport Protocol -- a very basic and fundamental communication protocol for exchanging messages with computer systems over a network.  I want to send SMTP from my house to you my fellow ham.  That seems reasonable, doesn't it?  I expect you to receive and read my "email."  But it doesn't work in most cases.

Carriers decided years ago that they did not expect SMTP to come from IP addresses of network segments assigned to residential areas unless it was destined for their email server, so they block it.  If it is not blocked by your ISP, there is a very good chance it will be blocked by the recipient's email service if they are doing what's expected of them and using a commercial email service.

You are not expected to send and receive your own mail, but to use a commercial service to handle your mail, like Yahoo, AOL, Charter, AT&T etc.  If your mail is going to and from one of those mail providers, it will go through.  If it is not, it will likely be blocked.  The repeal of net neutrality wasn't necessary for this to happen.  It has already happened.

It wasn't necessary to repeal net neutrality to accomplish this.  All that was necessary was to get 99.998% of the people to use a commercial email service that they didn't control.  It was easy.  They received it for "free."

How many of you have the capability to receive SMTP, and how many just let someone else do it for you?

And this you do with many similar things so that you can hardly be recognized as a user of the internet, but instead as a consumer of certain commercial services from Google/Youtube, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook etc.

The repeal of net neutrality is only a reflection of this fact.  Yahoo (Verizon) won't have any trouble getting messages through, and Alphabet (Gmail) can afford this (or all of AT&T and Charter combined for that matter).  But will your messaging work?
Logged
NEVBEN
Member

Posts: 98




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: December 08, 2017, 10:32:25 AM »

I think the Internet has been wildly successful without government control....  Again .. consumers choose.

"without government control"?  Who are you kidding?  The internet originated with the US government and it has controlled it from the beginning.  Winners are picked like Apple iTunes and Dropbox, and losers like Napster and Mega.  When MySpace didn't have all the features the intelligence community wanted, Facebook was released.  And if your statement has more to do with the telecom providers, they have been heavily regulated since the railroad days.

"Consumers choose."  Are we merely consumers of telecommunications?  I am surprised that a ham of all people would see telecommunications as something for a consumer to choose from among various commercial offerings.
Logged
NEVBEN
Member

Posts: 98




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: December 08, 2017, 10:39:26 AM »

If you want to know what Ham Radio looks like without net neutrality, imagine 99% of hams using a SDR from Kenwood, Yaesu, Icom, Flex or Elecraft.  And then the majority of hams using a digital mode that requires a Windows, Android or IOS app.
Logged
N1UK
Member

Posts: 2086




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: December 09, 2017, 09:15:53 AM »

Quote
Tachnology will take care of the issue? Gigabit internet is being rolled out to early adopter areas, given time it will be the standard.


and I am still waiting for dsl !!!



Mark N1UK
Logged
AA2UK
Member

Posts: 363




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: Yesterday at 02:20:49 AM »

Quote
Tachnology will take care of the issue? Gigabit internet is being rolled out to early adopter areas, given time it will be the standard.


and I am still waiting for dsl !!!



Mark N1UK

I don't think rolling out internet services has anything to do with NET Neutrality (NN). This is more of a financial decision
by rural ISP's.
Pretty much the same issues most cellular carriers face when trying to provide upgraded 4G services to rural customers.
The world won't end when or if NN is dropped/ or changed. How bad was the Internet B4 NN became the law of the land?
I used to run a rural WISP once NN kicked in it made rolling out service areas more difficult.
Bill, AA2UK
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!