EU Cripples Original Net Neutrality Proposal, Eliminates Roaming Fees

[Guest]

The European Union announced a final net neutrality proposal, which is to be approved by the EU Commission and the EU Parliament. The legislation weakens the previous proposal by the former Commission by allowing zero-rating and specialized services.

EU Cripples Original Net Neutrality Proposal, Eliminates Roaming Fees : Read more

 

[moniruzzaman khan]

good

 

[Guest]

I'd rather have roaming fees than Facebook "fake" internet. Roaming fees aren't important, people that are rich enough to travel often can afford it, you can buy a pre-paid local sim card, or just use a local wi-fi.

Positive discrimination is VERY dangerous. Customers should have guaranteed speed minimums, and they can handle QoS themselves.

Also, the specialized services makes no sense. Just reserve another frequency for that. Reserving bandwidth for IPTV? So youtube, netflix lag, you complain, they recommend IPTV. You don't even need that junk on your phone.

I really don't get why there is so much debate and negotiations with the players in the industry. When they spout garbage like "we need to be able to reserve bandwidth for a IPTV service we charge extra for", the Commission should just reject the suggestion and ask the person that said that to leave.

The question of internet isn't about shenanigans or wheeling-dealing. It's a collective consciousness that has become the most powerful information tool. Don't let politicians and business people decide it's fate!

PS: 4k streaming is superior to blu-ray. Standard blu-ray is 1080p.

 

[alidan]

I'd rather have roaming fees than Facebook "fake" internet. Roaming fees aren't important, people that are rich enough to travel often can afford it, you can buy a pre-paid local sim card, or just use a local wi-fi.

Positive discrimination is VERY dangerous. Customers should have guaranteed speed minimums, and they can handle QoS themselves.

Also, the specialized services makes no sense. Just reserve another frequency for that. Reserving bandwidth for IPTV? So youtube, netflix lag, you complain, they recommend IPTV. You don't even need that junk on your phone.

I really don't get why there is so much debate and negotiations with the players in the industry. When they spout garbage like "we need to be able to reserve bandwidth for a IPTV service we charge extra for", the Commission should just reject the suggestion and ask the person that said that to leave.

The question of internet isn't about shenanigans or wheeling-dealing. It's a collective consciousness that has become the most powerful information tool. Don't let politicians and business people decide it's fate!

PS: 4k streaming is superior to blu-ray. Standard blu-ray is 1080p.

first, in europe a 3-6 hour drive could have you cross several countries, you don't need to be rich to travel there.

second, 4k stream is better than blu-ray? so what 4k stream sends me 20+gb of data over the coarse of 2 hours?
it may have a higher resolution but quality wise... not so much...

think eirly dvds and old vhs tapes, the older tapes were heavy duty that were heavy because they had more medium to record data on to, while early dvds were many times crappy later vhs transfers.

you have an argument to make with perceivable quality if the stream is high enough bandwidth... but even than, we are still talking about the need for a 25gb+ stream to match bluray.

 

[alextheblue]

Positive discrimination is VERY dangerous. Customers should have guaranteed speed minimums, and they can handle QoS themselves.

Uh, except that you can only "handle QoS" on your internal network which is almost pointless unless your router is getting saturated. Once the packet exits YOUR network and hits your ISP's hardware (and so on), QoS is out of your control. Heck, with net neutrality it's out of their control too - no QoS at all since all packets have to be treated the same.

 

[trifler]

This Zero-rating thing is very bad. They should never have caved on this.

 

[house70]

"If a company has enough money to pay the ISP or mobile operator so the data consumption of its service isn't paid by customers,"....

Care to explain, or even better, to give an example where the costs are NOT eventually passed on to customers? I would love to become a customer to that company. People often forget that all costs are funneled down to customers; if Netflix was to buy some fast-lane bandwidth, rest assured the subscription price would rise to cover that cost.

 

[Guest]

Positive discrimination is VERY dangerous. Customers should have guaranteed speed minimums, and they can handle QoS themselves.

Uh, except that you can only "handle QoS" on your internal network which is almost pointless unless your router is getting saturated. Once the packet exits YOUR network and hits your ISP's hardware (and so on), QoS is out of your control. Heck, with net neutrality it's out of their control too - no QoS at all since all packets have to be treated the same.

Yes, exactly. That's why there needs to be a guaranteed minimum, both speed and latency, on their network, and no QoS on theirs also. All packets should be treated the same on their network.

QoS on your network can deal with latency which is important.

 

[Guest]

second, 4k stream is better than blu-ray? so what 4k stream sends me 20+gb of data over the coarse of 2 hours?
it may have a higher resolution but quality wise... not so much...

think eirly dvds and old vhs tapes, the older tapes were heavy duty that were heavy because they had more medium to record data on to, while early dvds were many times crappy later vhs transfers.

you have an argument to make with perceivable quality if the stream is high enough bandwidth... but even than, we are still talking about the need for a 25gb+ stream to match bluray.

You ignore encoding. Netflix 4k uses HEVC, blu-ray use MPEG-2 in many cases.

HEVC drops size by half from H264, which itself is half of MPEG-2.

So a 4k HEVC stream the size of a blu-ray does have 4 times resolution with the same quality.

 

[RunLuke]

I'd rather have roaming fees than Facebook "fake" internet. Roaming fees aren't important, people that are rich enough to travel often can afford it, you can buy a pre-paid local sim card, or just use a local wi-fi.

Positive discrimination is VERY dangerous. Customers should have guaranteed speed minimums, and they can handle QoS themselves.

Also, the specialized services makes no sense. Just reserve another frequency for that. Reserving bandwidth for IPTV? So youtube, netflix lag, you complain, they recommend IPTV. You don't even need that junk on your phone.

I really don't get why there is so much debate and negotiations with the players in the industry. When they spout garbage like "we need to be able to reserve bandwidth for a IPTV service we charge extra for", the Commission should just reject the suggestion and ask the person that said that to leave.

The question of internet isn't about shenanigans or wheeling-dealing. It's a collective consciousness that has become the most powerful information tool. Don't let politicians and business people decide it's fate!

PS: 4k streaming is superior to blu-ray. Standard blu-ray is 1080p.

Driving east for 20 minutes across a bridge and I'm in another country. Driving south for 3 hours I'm in another country. Expand to 6 hours add another three countries.

So, in less than a working days time I can get to any 5 countries. On the way I'll pass through at least one.

I'd want low roaming fees. So do businesses, I promise you.