A few quick things

Okay ... A few quick things.

1. Sort of in line with Corrupt's post this morning - WMATA needs to do something when there are delays across the region.  This morning, I did not have to arrive until 11, so I got on the bus around 10:30 knowing that they wouldn't be running with rush hour frequency - but figuring that they would still be crowded since a lot of people were delayed.  Well sure enough the bus was packed, so much so that we started skipping stops 2 after mine.  This is a normal operating proceedure (and perfectly fine), but when it is not rush hour and the next bus is probably 5-10 minutes behind - it becomes a problem for those people who have to wait.  Now I'm not saying that WMATA wasn't aware of these delays, but they should be able to do something - and I'm sure they would if they could.  But their hands are tied by Union contracts.  UGH.

You know how I feel about unions and the such, but I won't really go into that ... my gripe is more with an out-of-date employment structure for mass transit.  When transit companies were first made into public-private entities around the 1920's, the employment structure remained the same ... and as they shifted to completely public entities - still nothing changed.  Unfortunately, this is hurting us.  We all know that clearly you are going to need more bus/train drivers during the morning and evening rush hours - but unfortunately the hiring of true part-time employees to work during these shifts is basically unheard of ... thanks to unions.  I'm sorry unions, I realize you are looking out for everyones best interests - but you are screwing us.

2. Obama is right (again).  I really hope I don't make a habit of saying this -- it is getting kind of scary.  This morning Obama took time out of talking about the economic stimulus package to ask reporters "WTF is wrong with DC" (not exactly in those terms).  But he is right.  He was complaining about how his daughter's school - Sidwell Friends - has decided to close due to some snow and ice.  He said (per WaPo), "We're going to have to apply some flinty Chicago toughness to this town, I'm saying that when it comes to the weather, folks in Washington don't seem to be able to handle things."  And he is compeltely right.  The DC Metro area has no idea how to deal with weather of any kind.  I have said this all four years I have been here, and I am glad to see Obama noticed it too.

3.  This is the thing that really inspired me to write this post this very second.  Google took a huge step in favor of Net Nuetrality today, ironically in the same day that Comcast and AT&T took a step backwards by doing the RIAA's dirty work for them (here).  Google annouced this afternoon via their blog - here - the introduction of a project called the Measurement Lab.  Basically Google is also tired of ISPs trying to regulate what you can and cannot do with your connection (which you know Comcast loves to do), and wants people to know when they are being f---ed with.  To quote from Google's blog, "Researchers are already developing tools that allow users to, among other things, measure the speed of their connection, run diagnostics, and attempt to discern if their ISP is blocking or throttling particular applications."  And Google is giving them the ability to run these tools on Google servers around the globe.  Thank you Google :)

You can access the Measurement Lab by clicking here.

And here is just a great quote from Google:

At Google, we care deeply about sustaining the Internet as an open platform for consumer choice and innovation. No matter your views on net neutrality and ISP network management practices, everyone can agree that Internet users deserve to be well-informed about what they're getting when they sign up for broadband, and good data is the bedrock of sound policy. Transparency has always been crucial to the success of the Internet, and, by advancing network research in this area, M-Lab aims to help sustain a healthy, innovative Internet.

4. Oh one last thing ... The House voted down the DTV Delay Act.  While I previously posted that I was in favor of a delay, the Obama Administration failed to outline any real plan aside from delaying the date and throwing money at the problem.  The vote roll can be viewed here.

Out.

Net Neutrality ... huh?

I know Corrupt is all about laws to protect the people ... so he should be all about this one, but we will have to wait to find out I guess. Net Neutrality.

Whenever net neutrality comes up in the news I just end up pissed off ... because some ISP is just stepping all over the rights of the internet.  Anyway, what got me thinking about this time was a post a few weeks ago on Google's main blog about the concept of edge caching, and a WSJ article basically saying that Google was trying to control and lock down the internet through doing so.  Edge caching is something employed by ISPs to bring frequently accessed data closer to the end users, so for instance - the top 10 YouTube videos would be edge cached on an ISPs servers, so they ISP could utilize less traffic across the whole internet (and speed up the time it gets to the end user), by just sending the user to the copy on the ISPs server.  Google asserts that their openness in regards to setting up Edge server does not violate net neutrality and I tend to agree with them.

That said ... I think net neutrality is an increasingly important issue - as we see ISPs (cough, Comcast, cough) increasingly trying to regulate the amount of data a user can access.   The assertion from ISPs is that only a handful of users account for a majority of their network traffic - which raises their costs and makes the connection slower for all users - so there solution is to throttle back connection speeds for users who exceed a data limit.  I understand these companies need to make a profit, but I also don't think we need to be entering a time when we are paying per kb of data sent over our connections.  ISPs are definitely within ther purview to charge different prices for different speeds (most already do), but the idea of a data cap is something that bothers me.  The internet is about openness - it is why it has become so prevalent - because anything and everything is on it.

It is certainly scary to think that the 'last mile' of the internet is controlled by companies that have shown time and time again that they do not care about consumers and just want to make a dime.  I feel this applies to almost every consumer-ISP with the exception of Verizon, who I just like to think is  better than everyone else -- because FiOS, just is.  But even Verizon is not pro-net neutrality.

This was a small issue when it first came about in the early 2000s, but is slowly growing.  At the rate that the internet continues to expand, and our appetite for data continues to expand - network neutrality will certainly be an issue within our lifetimes and likely very soon.  And it is a very scary thought ... that access could be cut off - and there aren't too many laws protecting us.  So far the FCC has sided with consumers, ruling that it was illegal for Comcast to cut off users access to certain file sharing servers.  We can only hope that the FCC continues to side with consumers and Congress acts soon, though I'm sure any law they pass will be weak and virtually not enforceable.

Personally, I feel that most of the ISPs and hardware manufacturers are not just looking for a quick profit, they are making sure that they are not getting screwed.  These companies can't continue to support the Internet without making sure their own business survive.  In that sense a company like Comcast is out to make a profit and has no concern for the consumers - they have shown time and time again they have no concern for the common good.  Cablevision is the same way.  As for the rest of the ISPs ... I have hope.

The wikipedia article regarding Net Neutrality is here.

Do you have any thoughts?

FiOS - The new kid on the block

FiOS Sidebar.  I was talking about FiOS in my morning post this morning and wrote so much that I just decided to make a separate post for it. 

FiOS can provide cable television, telephone, and internet services to your home - Verizon operates as a cable provider in this sense (as most cable providers provide all 3 as well), and not just the telephone/internet provider that most know them as.  Although I can't find it right now - I am not looking that hard - I know Verizon used to advertise that the word fios is also Gaelic for "knowledge" - which makes sense because fios is able to bring so much knowledge (data) to your home.  Verizon is awesome.  

Basically FiOS is a service known asFTTP, or Fiber-to-the-premises - meaning that Verizon actually runs Fiber right to your home.  Most cable and telephone companies have FTTN, or Fiber-to-the-Node - which means that Fiber comes from the Central Office to the node in your neighborhood (serving anywhere from a dozen to a hundred homes), and then travels from that node via coax or some other kind of copper or other 1800's-esque wiring.  FTTP dramatically increases the bandwidth (amount of data) that can travel into and out of your house - because you have a dedicated fiber line, and your house is only requesting the data it needs at the time.  Meaning if you are watching Channel 3, only channel 3 is being sent over the fiber into your home.  Over FTTN, every channel has to be sent out over the coax to your house - so even if you are watching Channel 3, there needs to be room for Channel's 4 and 5 on that coax because that is what your neighbors are watching - which overall decreases your bandwidth.  

Those of you who have had a cable modem since the early days (this won't apply to you if you had DSL), will remember that at first it was blazing fast, and then as more people in your neighborhood got cable modems - it slowed down, until the cable company installed a new node.  This is essentially the same concept - yes the cable companies can keep adding nodes, but to what point -- why not just get the data right to the customer.  

AT&T also was caught up in the Fiber craze not to long ago - attempting to expand their lackluster cable service - UVerse (or something stupid like that).  But they decided to be cheap and only go for FTTN, combining that with their already lackluster customer service - they were branded as a normal cable operator and everyone hated that.  Okay, that was just my personal opinion ... but either way who cares - FiOS is better and coming to more places.

Verizon has taken on loads of debt to bring Fiber into neighborhoods (its very expensive), and doesn't even charge you to hook your home up to the Fiber (which costs another few hundred dollars) - but they are making a bet that this is where the future lies.  And I tend to agree with them.  As the internet becomes more prevalent in our lives (yes we will become even bigger information whores then we are today), we will demand more from our services and more data - and Verizon will be there.  Not to mention they can get blazing fast internet to you for really cheap (fiber is fast - its how the internet travels around the globe).  

But more importantly, I have never heard anyone rave about the great experience they had with their cable provider.  Comcast sucks, RCN sucks a little less, Cablevision sucks, Time Warner sucks, Charter sucks ... those are the only ones I can think of - but guess what, they all suck.  I'm sure Verizon has its problems, but any competition in the realm of cable providers can only be good.  

Anyway - if you have the option - get FiOS.