[opendtv] Re: Net neutrality heads to court Friday. Here’s what to expect.
- From: "Craig Birkmaier" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "brewmastercraig" for DMARC)
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2019 07:41:06 -0500
On Feb 1, 2019, at 9:41 PM, Manfredi (US), Albert E
<albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Millett repeatedly challenged the FCC’s assertion that high-speed Internet
service is fundamentally different from telephone service and thus deserves
to be regulated with a lighter touch. ... Whether consumers log on to their
pharmacy’s website to renew their prescriptions or 'push a bunch of buttons'
on the telephone, the end result is the same, Millett said."
What world does thus guy live in?
You can’t push buttons on a phone to renew a prescription. But you may be able
to talk to a pharmacist, who will determine if you have an eligible refill,
probably using the same database that the Internet website is connected to.
What this idiot said is actually confirmation of what Congress and the Courts
have held for several decades - refilling a prescription via a website is a
computer processing application, not a voice phone call.
That should be obvious. If an uninformed 6 of 9 Supreme Court justices, in
2005, before they even had broadband service, or could spell Internet, didn't
know this, the situation was rectified in 2015.
NO BERT. The court knew exactly what it was doing. Your slurs are not only
inaccurate, they are absurd.
Can’t spell I N T E R N E T...
Before they had broadband service? The cable industry started to deploy Docsis
in the ‘90’s. And then there is the minor issue that the government played a
primary role in developing the Internet via ARPA starting in the ‘70s.
The court knew exactly what it was doing in 2005 - upholding the laws passed by
Congress.
Then a rogue administration tried to make their own laws...
After people figured it out. Abuses started occurring only then, right around
2005, just very few years after broadband became available to many people.
(Before that, the Internet was too slow to compete successfully against other
services, so there appeared to be no problem.)
There were no abuses Bert. Every so called abuse was resolved through the
regulatory/court processes in place prior to 2015. Most were business disputes
like the so called Comcast throttling. Others were issues related to
controlling piracy. NONE were intentional throttling or blocking of access to
legal Internet sites.
"Johnson replied that 'voice service does not provide the same dynamic
experience … as accessing the Internet.' He argued that the difference was
one of both 'kind and degree,' and that Internet service comes with various
computer processing functions that are not inherent to telephone service,
such as translating URLs into IP addresses and vice versa."
Yup.
Perhaps the most important fact to consider is that voice telephony is in a
massive decline. This is from an article in The Atlantic in 2015:
One of the ironies of modern life is that everyone is glued to their phones,
but nobody uses them as phones anymore. Not by choice, anyway. Phone
calls—you know, where you put the thing up to your ear and speak to someone
in real time—are becoming relics of a bygone era, the “phone” part of a
smartphone turning vestigial as communication evolves, willingly or not, into
data-oriented formats like text messaging and chat apps.
Your are grasping onto archaic straws Bert. We suffered through a century of
government regulation of telecommunications as a “natural monopoly,’ which gave
us monopoly pricing and crippled innovation. We are now benefitting from more
than three decades of D E R E G U L A T I O N, and RAPID innovation as
competition has increased.
Those are such, frankly, stupid-ass arguments, that any technically-oriented
government agency should be really embarrassed to say such things.
The only person who should be embarrassed here is Bert.
Secondly, telephone systems also have yellow pages and 411 directory service.
Paper and a voice searching a database...
I just threw out 5 phonebooks yesterday. Each successive year has gotten
thinner and thinner. Archaic technology.
How is that fundamentally different from the DNS? It's an idiotic argument to
make, and once again, has no bearing on the need for neutrality guarantee for
telecoms.
DNS is a massive global database of addresses used by computers connecting to
the Internet to properly route the session. What you should be asking is how
DNS works with the legacy phone system to support VOIP.
And the FCC had no business, in 2002, to classify broadband access service
any differently from what they had classified dialup Internet access service
previously.
Sure they did. Congress told them to do it in 1996.
Those on the take feel obliged to insist on stupid arguments. Or is it really
cluelessness? Can't be anything else.
Don’t be so hard on yourself Bert...
;-)
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
