SL breaking the internet?

Read more here: http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/internet/05/16/net.neutrality.ap/index.html

Could SL be included in things like the streaming video?

FUD from people who oppose network neutrality.

FUD? im not THAT old, but i have no idea what that means

hows the sim btw

Huh. what'd I miss?

fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

This article isn't entirely accurate, in a lot of ways. For one it relies on the premise that the 'net is "meant" just for the occasional e-mail check and maybe an IM or two.

On the other hand, there's more dark fiber out there than we know what to do with. Bandwidth on the 'internet backplane' (as there really isnt a "backbone" anymore) really *has* increased since 1978, and at the same time, video compression methods have gotten a lot better. (Video, now, can be streamed at the same rates that audio could be streamed at in 1998. Maybe less.)

But it does do a lot to make people think that the dirty hippies proposing network neutrality are just bad, or dumb, or perhaps badumb.

You're going to hear a lot more of this "well the internet wasn't meant for more than email checking" in the near future. And while that's true, when DARPA commissioned it, it wasn't -- the stuff we have running today, it isn't your daddy's network.

oh... the ALIFE sim that the person i was responding to is in charge of. Its pretty cool have you seen it?

Michi has the right of it... mostly...

Tim Berners Lee is one of the chief proponents of net neutrality, and without him, there would be no web, no SL and the net would still be usenet and ftp. So basically, while it's a lot of the old conservatives opposing, the pioneers are still on our side.

That said, even the web was only designed for text transfer, but that doesn't mean we should ban or limit video streaming... it means we should update the infrastructure until it can really support the increasing demands we're making on it.

You are likely younger than me! But anyway, the sim is fine, if a little sparse yet, and use the link Kelly Linden provided. If you're so inclined

If we lose neutrality, we'll lose the 'free lunch' that most web services (YouToob, Google, SecondLife) provide, and have to pay premium for them to get through to us in the first place. This cannot be tolerated, if necessary, I will march on Washington.

Yeah, that will show them whose da boss!

Lol. Million Geek March. Bomb the telcos. etc, etc.

This article makes the collective cry.

Highways are laid out where old horse trails used to be. Therefore we shoudl not dirve cars on them....

Or more apt, taking away net netrality would be like converting all highways, roads, interstates into tollroads.

z...o...m...g... sign me up as geek #42

This is a very difficult problem.

Personally, I would have prefered it if the US simply blocked AT&T from gobbling up so many companies. Rather than net neutrality, maybe what we need are just lots of nodes .. after all, that's how the internet was designed.

So, the 64 of us get together and storm Ma Bell?

I'll join in any million geek march