Reader Asks if Net Neutrality Rule Spells Higher Costs for Users
We have already received a number of interesting reader comments on FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski's plans to propose net neutrality rules, which would prevent broadband providers from blocking or slowing Internet traffic tied to specific applications or services.
Some readers see the move as nothing less than a government takeover of the Web. Others say net neutrality is long overdue because consumers have borne high costs and been given limited choices at the hands of a few giant network operators who are reaping outsized profits off providing Web access.
Here, KHMJr, poses an interesting question about costs due to net neutrality regulation and how that could pass down to consumers. Agree? Disagree? Sound off!
"I have a few concerns.
As an iPhone user I appreciate Apple's efforts to keep malware off of the systems by reviewing and authorizing apps. With something like 65,000 apps approved in a year they seem to be doing a good job.
I also appreciate their efforts to keep porn off of the iPhone. We simply don't need it.
On the carrier side, my concern is that opening up the market totally will overload the current infrastructure. The United States is behind some countries (like Korea and Japan) but major increases in demand on a rapid basis can overload the system. The explosion of iPhones in various markets is showing that already. They add to the problem? It adds costs and that will be passed onto us.
Posted by: KHMJr | September 18, 2009 4:45 PM "
Get This Widget >>
Blogs That Reference This Entry
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Please email us to report offensive comments.
Posted by: gannon_dick | September 19, 2009 12:10 AM
Posted by: pablogarciaa | September 19, 2009 12:25 PM
Posted by: artbrodsky | September 20, 2009 7:59 PM
Posted by: artbrodsky | September 20, 2009 8:00 PM
Posted by: MoonDoggie | September 21, 2009 2:10 PM
Posted by: dampier | September 22, 2009 3:35 PM