NationStates Jolt Archive

The end of Internet neutrality really will spell the end of the Internet as we know it. Imagine letting a private company set up toll boths at every entrance to and every exit from the currently toll-free US Interstate Highway system, and you'll have a good idea what this means.

Unless you want the Internet to look like cable TV does now, visit here and help however you can: http://www.freepress.net/news/

Oh, noes, not teh Internets.

Good riddance to poor trash, I say.

Oh, noes, not teh Internets.

Good riddance to poor trash, I say.
[ smacks you repeatedly with an excessively large, semi-decomposed trout! ]

That reminnds me, I need to write a letter to the editor. Thanks.

[ smacks you repeatedly with an excessively large, semi-decomposed trout! ]

What? Those who make more money tend to be cleverer. Thus, we'd save ourselves a tonne of stupid by shutting them out.

What? Those who make more money tend to be cleverer. Thus, we'd save ourselves a tonne of stupid by shutting them out.
Stupid people can already afford internet costs. Making it more expensive won't get the stupid out of the internet.

Stupid people can already afford internet costs.
Looking around here I would beg to differ. But yeah, internet costs are several times what they should be for the level of service and bandwidth we receive in America.

Stupid people can already afford internet costs. Making it more expensive won't get the stupid out of the internet.

It will get them out of my Internet.

It will get them out of my Internet.
So will unplugging the cable from the modem.

Stupid people can already afford internet costs.
Looking around here I would beg to differ.
What, we're not stupid enough for you? o.O

What, we're not stupid enough for you? o.O
I misread what Ifreann wrote -_-
Ignore that post >_>

So will unplugging the cable from the modem.

I much prefer getting rid of them/you.

And, modem? What century and/or backward country are you living in?

I misread what Ifreann wrote -_-
Ignore that post >_>
....Does anybody else find this sweetly ironic?

I much prefer getting rid of them/you.

And, modem? What century and/or backward country are you living in?

He lives in a country he loathes. Yay.

I misread what Ifreann wrote -_-
Ignore that post >_>
Yeah, well, too late. :p

Simonist']....Does anybody else find this sweetly ironic?
Very. :p

He lives in a country he loathes. Yay.

He's hardly the only one.

He's hardly the only one.

You thinking about emigrating here then? :p

You thinking about emigrating here then? :p

I shared the sentiment about his country, not my own.

Fass, you're misunderstanding the total implications of this. Yes, it may lock out poorer people, but it will also result in the telecom companies limiting your bandwidth to sites that are not commercially viable to them.

I shared the sentiment about his country, not my own.

Awww...you won't come here and hang out with me? :(

Fass, you're misunderstanding the total implications of this. Yes, it may lock out poorer people, but it will also result in the telecom companies limiting your bandwidth to sites that are not commercially viable to them.

That's OK. The Internet was a frivolous fad anyway.

Awww...you won't come here and hang out with me? :(

You? No.

You? No.

No lovin' from Fass! *cries*

No lovin' from Fass! *cries*

You must have been rendered emotionally destitute.

I believe it would take too much work/time/money/cooperation to restructure the net in such a way. This is just going to be a lot of hot-air back and forth until the telecoms run out of steam.

That's OK. The Internet was a frivolous fad anyway.
It's lasting pretty long for a frivolous fad. That tamogatchi fad a few years ago didn't even last 6 months.

I don't get it. Rich people have been able to move about in choppers and jet planes while all I'm able to get is a bus pass every month, and yet no one complains.

Yet, when big companies and spammers who use zillions more bandwidth than I do for their commercial purposes are asked to carry their weight's worth everybody screams bloody murder.

People are odd... ooooooooddddddd.

Someday our children and grandchildren will look back in disgust at how easily we surrendered our freedoms.

And now the government is recruiting private companies to spy on us.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/01/20/MNGEVGQED31.DTL

It's lasting pretty long for a frivolous fad.

You should tell that to people wearing bell bottoms, or culottes.

You should tell that to people wearing bell bottoms, or culottes.


Wait a minute-you're NOT wearing culottes right now?

Wait a minute-you're NOT wearing culottes right now?

Nah, he's wearing a corset. :p

You should tell that to people wearing bell bottoms, or culottes.
Wasn't there a group in some French revolution called the sans-culottes? Or did I imagine that?

Wait a minute-you're NOT wearing culottes right now?

No, seeing as culottes (http://www.commonsensepatterns.com/images/csp/9138B%20Wms%20Culotte%20Jumper.gif) are female garbs, a cross between a skirt and a pair of trousers.

The end of net neutrality will result in rich people: "Paying their fair share." What it will result in is the ability for corporations to deny access to sites on a whim.

The precedent is already being set with certain ISP's blocking sites which could potentially harm their profit margins.



And claiming the internet is a fad is a bit hypocritical for people who seem to use it regularly. Fad's don't result in billion dollar google sales or online... well everything.

After the creation of online gaming its hard for most computer gamers to even imagine what gaming would be like without it. And now that console gamers are suckling on the teat of online multiplayer I believe that there too it will be hard to wean them off it.


Face it: the internet is here to stay. The only question is what kind of internet do we want to see when we sign on in the morning.

NT

What? Those who make more money tend to be cleverer. Thus, we'd save ourselves a tonne of stupid by shutting them out.

Fass forsakes his people SHOCKER!

What? Those who make more money tend to be cleverer.
The word of God, spoken through Fass. Tremble ye beggars, you are but meek parasites. Eat your cake and speak no more.


A world without the poor...Heaven. :)

Someday our children and grandchildren will look back in disgust at how easily we surrendered our freedoms.

And now the government is recruiting private companies to spy on us.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/01/20/MNGEVGQED31.DTL

Heh, that article reminds me of the research I did for a psych project.
<_<
>_>
I got to research "terrorism." I spent some time waiting for the FBI to show up at my doorway...

I believe it would take too much work/time/money/cooperation to restructure the net in such a way. This is just going to be a lot of hot-air back and forth until the telecoms run out of steam.
Exactly.

I believe it would take too much work/time/money/cooperation to restructure the net in such a way. This is just going to be a lot of hot-air back and forth until the telecoms run out of steam.
I'm not so sanguine about it. The telecoms have already made noises like they want to start bidding wars for access to their "pipes" and I have little doubt that they'll start off by shaking down Google and Microsoft and will quickly work their way down the food chain to gamers and personal bloggers.

The end of Internet neutrality really will spell the end of the Internet as we know it. Imagine letting a private company set up toll boths at every entrance to and every exit from the currently toll-free US Interstate Highway system, and you'll have a good idea what this means.

Unless you want the Internet to look like cable TV does now, visit here and help however you can: http://www.freepress.net/news/

Don't care, not American.

I don't get it. Rich people have been able to move about in choppers and jet planes while all I'm able to get is a bus pass every month, and yet no one complains.

Yet, when big companies and spammers who use zillions more bandwidth than I do for their commercial purposes are asked to carry their weight's worth everybody screams bloody murder.

People are odd... ooooooooddddddd.
You've missed the entire point. I suggest you visit the site and actually, like ... READ the articles! :p

Nah, he's wearing a corset. :p
And nipple-clips! :D

You've missed the entire point. I suggest you visit the site and actually, like ... READ the articles! :p
I did! I've been following the story for a couple of months now. It's not like this happened just yesterday, you know. And, although I can see how internet purists are concerned, I really don't see the catastrophic even taking place.

In fact, I remember that pretty much the same debate took place when advertising and commercial operators first became interested in the new fangled invention called the internet. Many thought it would be the end of the internet, and that any kind of commercial activity went against its spirit, etc.

I did! I've been following the story for a couple of months now. It's not like this happened just yesterday, you know. And, although I can see how internet purists are concerned, I really don't see the catastrophic even taking place.
There was a Letter to the Editor in the paper the other day - Time Warner cable areas did not air FOX News.

In fact, I remember that pretty much the same debate took place when advertising and commercial operators first became interested in the new fangled invention called the internet. Many thought it would be the end of the internet, and that any kind of commercial activity went against its spirit, etc.
Telecoms have already proven they will do whatever it takes to put their product ahead of the competition and ensure they will continue to take in profit.

I'm sure the government is going along with this because
a) They don't know fucking shit
b) the private corporations can and will stop "pirating" of software and media with unhindered control of the internet because it will hurt their profits.

b) the private corporations can and will stop "pirating" of software and media with unhindered control of the internet because it will hurt their profits.
If the government couldn't do it, how could the corporations?

If the government couldn't do it, how could the corporations?
Uh ... because the corporation managers are smarter than the average government functionary? Ya think??? :p

and so America takes another turn down the road towards becomming a police state. After the patriot-act, the emminent domian bullshit, the spying on us citizens illegally, wire tapping, and a corrupt power hungry federal goverment has already happened. How many other Americans want to excorise the Right of Revolution soon? *loads gun*

There was a Letter to the Editor in the paper the other day - Time Warner cable areas did not air FOX News.
Change cable companies or get a DTH system. Or get together with your neighbors and demand that they feature FOX News. That's what happened in Texas, I think it was, when a cable company refused to carry MTV.


Telecoms have already proven they will do whatever it takes to put their product ahead of the competition and ensure they will continue to take in profit.
You mean they will act as if they were a private business? Shocking horror! That can't be true!

Look, the internet currently is a mess, a god awful mess, traffic wise. Spam, torrents, and unsecured finantial transactions all competing for the same limited bandwidth with stuff like information services and the like. All they are going to do is mark some packets as "urgent" to be delivered first while others wait, in essence creating a toll fast lane. That doesn't mean they are going to block traffic on the free lanes, it'll simply move slower. How slower? Chances are that individual and medium users won't notice, although big businesses who don't want to pay the toll booth will see some reduction.

At least for the time being you'll be able to keep pirating. After all, the telecoms can stop that traffic right now if they wanted to, just by blocking the packets. They don't not because they can't but because they would piss their customers no end.

Yeah, I'm not naïve, the writing's on the wall and the days of the internet as a free-for-all wild frontier are over. There will be more regulation, not less, and that'll bring good and bad things with it; but is the only way in which it can keep moving forward.

Look, the internet currently is a mess, a god awful mess, traffic wise. Spam, torrents, and unsecured finantial transactions all competing for the same limited bandwidth with stuff like information services and the like. All they are going to do is mark some packets as "urgent" to be delivered first while others wait, in essence creating a toll fast lane. That doesn't mean they are going to block traffic on the free lanes, it'll simply move slower. How slower? Chances are that individual and medium users won't notice, although big businesses who don't want to pay the toll booth will see some reduction.

At least for the time being you'll be able to keep pirating. After all, the telecoms can stop that traffic right now if they wanted to, just by blocking the packets. They don't not because they can't but because they would piss their customers no end.

They don't right now because doing so would get them into a legal case with the FTC for violating legislation that requires they provide equal access to the lines. That's what this legislation changes. Otherwise why would they need legislation for it, right?

To say that the regular user won't notice the difference is to place a lot more trust in the telco companies than they've shown any reason to deserve.


Yeah, I'm not naïve, the writing's on the wall and the days of the internet as a free-for-all wild frontier are over. There will be more regulation, not less, and that'll bring good and bad things with it; but is the only way in which it can keep moving forward.

No, it's not, actually. They could simply act within the current legislation, provide equal access for all, and establish a standard where packets with the "streaming video" header get preferential routing. If it does end up costing more, they raise their rates to the general consumer, or, and here's a novel idea.. charge for bandwidth used.

This legislation will allow them full capability to slow down any packets that come from a competitor. Considering that the average internet user won't wait more than 30 seconds for a page to start loading before going somewhere else, it then basically splits the internet along telco lines. Got AT&T internet? Great! You can use Excite or Lycos. Good luck getting to Yahoo though, as they're an MCI subsidiary.

Want your business to succeed on the net? Better pay the AT&T subscription fee.. and the MCI subscription fee.. and the Verizon subscription fee.. otherwise you're just narrowing your potential market to the ones that happen to subscribe to the service you're on.

Basically it'll be a government legislatied tax on online businesses that gets delivered directly to the corporations using the lines that were subsidized in the first place by the public.