Even the article's writer says that "after the conference call and reading the agreement, I’m not sure there’s much to say beyond the fact that this agreement basically keeps the network neutrality situation the same."
Even the article's writer says that "after the conference call and reading the agreement, I’m not sure there’s much to say beyond the fact that this agreement basically keeps the network neutrality situation the same."
We have two options for high speed internet here. AT&T and Comcast. Comcast is the only option that gets me above 10Mbps.
The only alternative on the horizon? AT&T's new service. At least that'll be a viable alternative to Comcast, but it's still hardly what one could call variety.
Where do I live? Atlanta, in the city limits, less than three miles from the heart of the city.
Latency is horrible. I consider this a plus -- no temptation.
It may be possible to use technical measures (QoS etc) to reduce the latency problems on wireless for applications that need low latency (eg Voip).
Do we really want to regulate now to rule this out? I have very mixed feelings on this.