Internet neutrality

R

Russel

New Member
So I see in the USA they are trying to pass a law that would create these "lanes" for the wealthier firms. Would there be a way to bypass this? i think its completely wrong that Youtube should get prefernece say over Vimeo, or Facebook over Tumblr. The net should be neutral. So woiuld there be a way to get the same loading times on Vimeo as Youtube if Youtube use a faster lane?
 
Russel said:
So I see in the USA they are trying to pass a law that would create these "lanes" for the wealthier firms. Would there be a way to bypass this? i think its completely wrong that Youtube should get prefernece say over Vimeo, or Facebook over Tumblr. The net should be neutral. So woiuld there be a way to get the same loading times on Vimeo as Youtube if Youtube use a faster lane?
Click to expand...

references, links other evidence to review and comment?
 
I think he's talking about sites paying ISP's to provide higher priority for them over their competitors. This is very well known, and the wireless carriers are already having preferred data for certain services where it doesn't count against your data plan. The big guys like Netflix can afford it, while the smaller startups can't, and users will prefer streaming Netflix for free over having to use their data plan for another service.
 
WRXGuy1 said:
I think he's talking about sites paying ISP's to provide higher priority for them over their competitors. This is very well known, and the wireless carriers are already having preferred data for certain services where it doesn't count against your data plan. The big guys like Netflix can afford it, while the smaller startups can't, and users will prefer streaming Netflix for free over having to use their data plan for another service.
Click to expand...

yes, this. Is there a way around it?
 
WRXGuy1 said:
I think he's talking about sites paying ISP's to provide higher priority for them over their competitors. This is very well known, and the wireless carriers are already having preferred data for certain services where it doesn't count against your data plan. The big guys like Netflix can afford it, while the smaller startups can't, and users will prefer streaming Netflix for free over having to use their data plan for another service.
Click to expand...

Actually came on CF to see if anyone was talking about this. I heard AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon are the biggies.

I thought it was a different - that the big ISP's would charge the common people more to use the big websites like YouTube, Facebook, etc.

The only way I can see getting around this is :confused:possibly:confused: using a proxy that shows your IP address as coming from another country? My head is not up my *** - I just don't know how this whole thing works.
 
I would imagine that a proxy or VPN would always reside in the 'slower lane' since it wouldn't be to a 'blessed' destination address and being encrypted would have your traffic not be able to be inspected.

You could probably go for a business class type of connection with your own defined QoS and/or VPN to a data center based proxy or endpoint from there.
 
beers said:
I would imagine that a proxy or VPN would always reside in the 'slower lane' since it wouldn't be to a 'blessed' destination address and being encrypted would have your traffic not be able to be inspected.

You could probably go for a business class type of connection with your own defined QoS and/or VPN to a data center based proxy or endpoint from there.
Click to expand...
Not to mention that even with unbiased QoS, VPN's and proxies are slower than when not using them, simply because you are bouncing to the ISP, out to a VPN/Proxy server, back to the ISP, then to your destination. If the VPN is in another country, it is MUCH worse. This doesn't take into account the overhead from using these services.
 
beers said:
I would imagine that a proxy or VPN would always reside in the 'slower lane' since it wouldn't be to a 'blessed' destination address and being encrypted would have your traffic not be able to be inspected.

You could probably go for a business class type of connection with your own defined QoS and/or VPN to a data center based proxy or endpoint from there.
Click to expand...

I have an VPN with Torguard. Been using them for about 3 years now. Speeds are slower, depending on which country you choose, but usually with Canada and Netherlands, speeds can still get up to about 1.5MB/s out of a max (that I've got) 2.0MB/s. Offers 35 country proxies, including 6 USA proxies (no torrents) and one 256bit AES encryption proxy. I'm very happy with it.

What's QoS?
 
demonikal said:
I have an VPN with Torguard. Been using them for about 3 years now. Speeds are slower, depending on which country you choose, but usually with Canada and Netherlands, speeds can still get up to about 1.5MB/s out of a max (that I've got) 2.0MB/s. Offers 35 country proxies, including 6 USA proxies (no torrents) and one 256bit AES encryption proxy. I'm very happy with it.

What's QoS?
Click to expand...

QoS = quality of service

My problem with VPN's is that my home internet connection is 170Mbps (21MB/s), so I can't find any VPN that comes close.
 
WRXGuy1 said:
QoS = quality of service

My problem with VPN's is that my home internet connection is 170Mbps (21MB/s), so I can't find any VPN that comes close.
Click to expand...

Wow, that's an insane internet speed. I've heard of Comcast offering speeds at 200Mb/s, but it costs so much. And I've heard Comcast is more likely to throttle user's speeds than AT&T, hence why I never switched over.
 
demonikal said:
Wow, that's an insane internet speed. I've heard of Comcast offering speeds at 200Mb/s, but it costs so much. And I've heard Comcast is more likely to throttle user's speeds than AT&T, hence why I never switched over.
Click to expand...
That's who I have, Comcast. I'm paying $90/mo for 170/23. No throttling at all, and no caps at the moment (they got rid of them about 2 years ago). I've probably used about a 1TB or so a month lol.
 
WRXGuy1 said:
That's who I have, Comcast. I'm paying $90/mo for 170/23. No throttling at all, and no caps at the moment (they got rid of them about 2 years ago). I've probably used about a 1TB or so a month lol.
Click to expand...

Okay, yeah, it was more than 2 years ago that I heard about the throttling. The most I've ever downloaded in a whole month was probably no more than 50GB.
 
demonikal said:
Okay, yeah, it was more than 2 years ago that I heard about the throttling. The most I've ever downloaded in a whole month was probably no more than 50GB.
Click to expand...
You'd be surprised how much you actually use.

The reason I used so much lately is because I backup my data to my office for my offsite backup, which was about 600GB+.
 
Uverse has a limit of I believe 250GB and between me redownloading a bunch of games for Steam and the rest of my house we never got close to that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top