Net Neutrality By Fiat: Take the Narrowband Pledge

I admire all the work and passion that has gone into arguing for net neutrality. As a long time 'net user myself (I first signed on to ARPANet in '87) it warms the cockles of my heart to see that people still get it. But I have an idea to really drive the point home.

Many people have pointed out that with high bandwidth on sale, the 'free' internet is going to slow down to modem speeds. So, fine. If the law passes, let's go back to modems.

They're cheap. They're ubiquitous. They're secure. They work with POTS and you might even be able to get them to work with VOIP phones (although that would tend to defeat the purpose). Modern web technologies have already greatly reduced the amount of code and the number of images necessary to generate a slick and useful site, and many sites offer smaller, lighter versions for handheld devices. So we're not so far away.

Let's show the suits how many people are willing to give big telecom and big media the finger and go back to narrowband if broadband is no longer neutral territory. If the 'neutral' net runs at narrowband speeds anyway, what have we got to lose?

Who's with me? If I can get a good show of hands, maybe if nothing else we can scare some legislators straight.

Comment below if you're willing to take the Narrowband Pledge, and go back to a modem if, and as long as, the net neutrality movement fails.

•  I love your plan

  And I will go to modem. It will pinch, but at this point what choice do the people have...  unless they want to open an online store...

  by Monkey for the people on Tue May 02, 2006 at 10:01:31 PM PDT

•  Your poll

  does not mention short wave radio!

  by Monkey for the people on Tue May 02, 2006 at 10:02:40 PM PDT

•  Here's Some Ancient History For You--

  There was a time I thought we could revolutionize the world.

  With GOPHER.

  If you're not tied to graphics, sound and video for routine communication, it's amazing how much information you can link, spread and analyze with text menus and documents.

  And 286 processors. And yes 1200k modems.

  WordPerfect 4.2 remains a speed demon in the hands of a touch typist, especially with the old left-side F-Key arrangement. As long as you don't need realtime publication quality typesetting.

  The problem is that I personally don't know what management's capability is of interfering with even lower tech internet based communication. I'm not optimistic.

  by Gooserock on Tue May 02, 2006 at 10:18:14 PM PDT

  •  I remember Gopher!

    It was actually really nice. It just had the misfortune of gathering steam just before the web made its public debut.

    I remember reading early articles about the web, thinking "what's the big deal? I can already do that with Gopher..."

    Heh.

    by oldjohnbrown on Tue May 02, 2006 at 10:22:46 PM PDT

•  I think I would just disconnect.

  If the Net becomes a push medium like cable or censored like China's internet, then I'll opt out altogether. No Net, no cable, no TV. I'll get my information the old fashioned way, by looking around and by talking to people. Media is an assault on my senses anyway, so while I'd miss out on the breadth and ubiquity of information, I will still have access to the depth and preciousness of information.

  by sravaka on Tue May 02, 2006 at 10:29:57 PM PDT

•  I don't have broadband anyway, I don't think

  My husband laughs at me when he comes home from work, but oh, well...it is all I have and I can get a lot from the sites here and other places as long as I am patient.  

  I am sort of glad to hear that I am not in danger.

  by cfk on Tue May 02, 2006 at 10:35:48 PM PDT

•  I can read email at 300 baud

  I know this because I had an old 1200 baud modem briefly in the early 90s and when we had trouble getting it to work we lowered the connection speed to 300 baud and I could read the characters of my text-only email as they refreshed on the screen. It was great!!

  by plymouth on Tue May 02, 2006 at 10:46:02 PM PDT

•  beware: phone lines that sabotage modem use

  Speaking from extensive experience here.

  Certain types of telephone carrier technology seriously interfere with the use of modems.  

  The obvious case is VOIP.  But that is just a special case of packet switched carrier telephony.  There are private carriers that rely heavily on packet switching, and woe be to anyone who tries to make a modem work on them, you will sit there and listen to perpetual handshake until the connection drops.  

  I've had this happen with the external modems we used to use for remote access dialup for making programming changes on voicemail systems.  These modems were tweaked by us to stick to 9600 baud (geeky explanation omitted to save space).  They worked fine on SBC (now AT&T California) lines, but not on XO Communications lines (a competing local carrier for business accounts).  I'd dial up and the damn thing would handshake forever, taking six to ten tries before it would connect.  Or it would connect and then in the midst of a programming session, just randomly disconnect.  From what I could tell, it would seem that XO is using packet switching with a somewhat unusual modulation or compression routine that sounds good enough for voice that you don't notice it (unless you have trained ears and pay close attention), but interferes with the modulation techniques used by modems.  

  What I am concerned about is that one of two things may happen to thwart our planned bandwidth protest:

  One, telcos convert to packet-switched lines or carrier.  This will cause modems to become un-usable.  This is not a conspiracy, it's merely the result of the ongoing bastardization of technologies to serve purposes for which they were not designed.  

  Two, telcos stop offering unlimited-rate local service, where you can stay on the phone as long as you like and not pay per-minute charges.  This is already the norm in Manhattan, where you have never been able to get unlimited local calling.  

  The way to block the latter state of affairs is to cite racially discriminatory impact: in the early 1980s, a study by Southern New England Telephone (Connecticut) found that, below the poverty line, black families made ten times as many minutes of phone calls as white families.  Black families used far more local minutes than white families all the way up the income scale to about middle-class level, at which point white families started using more local minutes than black families.  

  SO: Any attempt to start making people pay for basic residential landline service by the minute, can be shown to have a discriminatory impact, and that makes it subject to antidiscrimination standards.  If you want to fight that fight, start organizing now, and be prepared to do some serious research and serious explaining to educate the public.  

  Meanwhile, the bigger fight is to maintain the proper separation of media: a computer is NOT a television, was not intended to be, and should not be turned into another version of TV.  

  And if anyone else here is interested in resurrecting another potentially useful piece of geek-history, go take a look at FIDOnet.  

  by G2geek on Tue May 02, 2006 at 11:01:41 PM PDT

  •  Wish you would write a diary on this

    Your own info, and invite tech input from full range of experts.

    This is vital. If landlines fail, then what?

    Is anyone thinking about possible alternatives?

    by Creosote on Wed May 03, 2006 at 12:17:17 AM PDT

•  If the suits get their tiered plan through

  Congress, I'll cancel my Internet and cable (same company) until it's back to normal. I'll protest with my wallet.

  by LiterateWolf on Tue May 02, 2006 at 11:15:05 PM PDT

•  I'm glad you're thinking

  I have been wondering what we can do, too. Thanks for starting a discussion. I absolutely think it's high time we organized major protests to drive points home by DRYING UP the MONEY going into CORPORATE coffers. And that we have some Plan Bs and Plan Cs in the hopper. Radio Free dKos here we come!

  by JuliaAnn on Wed May 03, 2006 at 12:49:41 AM PDT

•  Let's cancel our cellphones too

  If net neutrality legislation fails, how about a massive boycott of AT&T + Verizon on all front? I, for one, am willing to cancel my cell phone contract with Verizon and switch to a different carrier. I would imagine there are at least a few thousand others who are willing to do the same?

  by grg on Fri May 05, 2006 at 12:13:16 PM PDT