Talk:Net neutrality

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Net neutrality:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:


Bias in favor of Net Neutraility?[edit]

In the section, "User intolerance for slow-loading sites", a study by S.S. Krishnan and Ramesh Sitaraman is brought up as possible evidence that video users accommodate to faster speeds making slower download speeds "intolerable".

The quote, "The results demonstrate how users can get used to faster Internet connectivity, leading to higher expectation of Internet speed, and lower tolerance for any delay that occurs," is only one possible interpretation in favor of their hypothesis. Another interpretation that is not brought up in the article is that users with faster internet will tend to watch more videos that they aren't willing to wait for, whereas users of slower internet choose which videos they want to watch more carefully, and don't generally pick videos that they would be willing to abandon sooner because of the cost of downloading any video.

In general, the controls and details of the experiment, as well as critical discussion around the results are ambiguous and biased favorably toward Net Neutrality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zorgate (talkcontribs) 20:10, 23 August 2016 (UTC) Zorgate (talk) 12:26, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Review of article for class[edit]

Net neutrality is essentially the idea that all data transmitted over the Internet should be treated fairly, with no particular type of data given priority over another. The status of net neutrality across the world in legal terms varies greatly; the United States' Federal Communications Commission recently adopted the idea of net neutrality, and has rules in place to enforce it.

This article is excellent: it is quite long and detailed, has tons of references, and is very well researched and explains all about net neutrality very well. [Belinrahs|talktomeididit] 23:30, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Regarding first section on "Net Neutrality" and the section on "Dumb pipe"[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians! I have noticed that a lot of you have mentioned that this article contains some biases. Maybe presenting the two sides of the net neutrality debate in the first section before mentioning Comcast's violation of net neutrality principles would help to make the information more neutral.

Also, in the Definition and related principles section, there is no mention of who coined the concept of "Dumb Network" (George Gilder). It was mentioned who coined the term 'net neutrality', hence, this pattern needs to be followed when defining the other concepts. --Ramloc11 (talk) 20:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Pai on net neutrality[edit]

The current section on the "United States" includes several statements that Pai "wants" or "thinks" certain things. No one but Pia knows what he really "wants" and "thinks". We only know what he does. I'm rewording those sentences to make them more neutral.

Pai claims he wants to '"reestablish" the power of market forces in regulating the Internet.

"Pai says the reversal will increase infrastructure investment and innovation among broadband companies." He fails to mention that it will also throttle free speech and competition: Net neutrality became a major issue after Comcast was caught censoring the web traffic from a competitor. DavidMCEddy (talk) 01:59, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

why is this article written in such a pretentious, wonkish manner?[edit]

"Research suggests that a combination of policy instruments will help realize the range of valued political and economic objectives central to the network neutrality debate."

"A more detailed proposed definition of technical and service network neutrality suggests that service network neutrality is the adherence to the paradigm that operation of a service at a certain layer is not influenced by any data other than the data interpreted at that layer, and in accordance with the protocol specification for that layer."

These sentences are nonsense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.224.16.12 (talk) 16:54, 12 July 2017 (UTC)


Yeah, the first sentence you quoted caught my eye as a tad "odd," as well as this bit at the end of the sentence following it,

...along with limiting providers and regulating the options those providers can offer.

I can see how that might be technically true, but it becomes suspicious in the context of disinformation campaigns that seek to highlight net neutrality as being detrimental to ISPs.
Note to self: double check the sources used for the above sentences,
1st [1] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2910104
Extra bit [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/27/technology/net-neutrality-fcc-vote-internet-utility.html
2nd from unsigned 199.224.16.12:[3] https://www.hbarel.com/analysis/policy/what-is-network-neutrality
Mystyc1 (talk) 01:45, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Net neutrality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:46, 22 July 2017 (UTC)