Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet Networking IT Your Rights Online

Reason To Hope Carriers Won't Win the War On Netflix 213

Posted by timothy
from the but-the-skirmishing-will-continue dept.
Nemo the Magnificent writes "A few days ago we talked over a post by David Raphael accusing Verizon of slowing down Netflix, by way of throttling Amazon AWS. Now Jonathan Feldman gives us reason to believe that the carriers won't win the war on Netflix, because tools for monitoring the performance of carriers will emerge nd we'll catch them if they try. I just now exercised one such tool, NetNeutralityTest.com from Speedchedker Ltd. My carrier is Verizon (FiOS), and the test showed my download speed at the moment to be 12 Mbps. It was the same to Linode in NJ but only 3 Mbps to AWS East. Hmm."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Reason To Hope Carriers Won't Win the War On Netflix

Comments Filter:
  • by deconfliction (3458895) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @05:44PM (#46205273)

    Sure, one extremely popular destination on the internet is safe, because throngs of angry users will raise a stink. But what about all the small players who get throttled into oblivion before their innovations get a chance to have the kind of army of defensive consumers that Netflix has?

    This is an information warfare[1] campaign where the Establishment is trying to make sure they stay there indefinitely, safe from all new comers.

    [1] http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4766259&cid=46193879 [slashdot.org]

  • by hsmith (818216) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @05:49PM (#46205315)
    Even bigger issue is, if you are hosting your infrastructure on AWS, your customers will get slower service.

    In the end, I am unsure how the FCC lets this occur. I pay GOOD money to my shitbag carrier to get access to my content. If I pay for 50MBPS download, I don't give a fuck what content it is, I want 50MBPS.
  • by Shakrai (717556) * on Sunday February 09, 2014 @06:02PM (#46205401) Journal

    Just saying that a particular path is slow doesn't mean that it's Verizon interfering - it's more likely something else that's causing the problem.

    Dude, you're forgetting the talking points of the modern internet crowd. Any and all unexplained slowdown is the result of ill intention by ones ISP. The fact that the network is a broad collection of networks that your ISP has no control over is irrelevant. Congestion at a peering site two networks removed from your ISP? That's Verizon's fault! Google doesn't give Youtube the money to upgrade their infrastructure? Verizon's fault!

  • by Sique (173459) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @06:26PM (#46205557) Homepage
    The reason being that those small players aren't interesting enough to design specific net traffic rules for them. And if they grow big enough to appear on the provider's radar, they are so wellknown, it will be noticed if they get throttled.
  • by Jane Q. Public (1010737) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @07:00PM (#46205863)

    Sure, one extremely popular destination on the internet is safe, because throngs of angry users will raise a stink.

    Well, I wouldn't say that. For example, P2P was throttled because of its bandwidth consumption... and was rescued by the "user community", even though there was no large corporate interest behind it. But your point is taken: this could represent a huge barrier-to-entry for startups.

    Folks, there is a simple solution to all this: pressure the government to classify ISPs as Title II Common Carriers, as they should have in the very beginning. (Corporate lobbying prevented it.)

    Make them common carriers, and a huge set of problems essentially goes away overnight. Net Neutrality is built-in. Snooping (including government and corporate snooping) is prohibited. Etc. It may not be perfect, but it's just a vastly better world, all around.

  • by Jane Q. Public (1010737) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @07:08PM (#46205905)
    I don't know if it's a "bigger issue". It's certainly part of the issue.

    ISPs want to charge big content providers (like AWS and Netflix) for using more bandwidth.

    But everybody has seemed to keep forgetting that bandwidth is already paid for by the end-users. This is just a way for the big ISPs to double-dip. That very definitely should be prevented.

    And please, nobody give me guff about how people pay for "average data rates" and how Netflix saturates the infrastructure. U.S. customers already pay among the highest rates for some of the slowest service in the Western world. All because of the ISP oligopoly. U.S. cable companies have made record profits almost every year, and haven't been re-investing those profits in infrastructure in proportion.

    Make them Common Carriers under Title II, and end the insanity.
  • by Dan667 (564390) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @10:30PM (#46207067)
    they are going to lose a lot of people like digg did when they rolled out their redesign. I wonder why they are ignoring this self inflicted threat to their profits.

My problem lies in reconciling my gross habits with my net income. -- Errol Flynn Any man who has $10,000 left when he dies is a failure. -- Errol Flynn

Working...