[QUOTE=InformationClearingHouse]August 06, 2010 "Huffington Post" -- For years, Internet advocates have warned of the doomsday scenario that will play out on Monday: Google and Verizon will announce a deal that the New York Times reports "could allow Verizon to speed some online content to Internet users more quickly if the content's creators are willing to pay for the privilege."
The deal marks the beginning of the end of the Internet as you know it. Since its beginnings, the Net was a level playing field that allowed all content to move at the same speed, whether it's ABC News or your uncle's video blog. That's all about to change, and the result couldn't be more bleak for the future of the Internet, for television, radio and independent voices.
How did this happen? We have a Federal Communications Commission that has been denied authority by the courts to police the activities of Internet service providers like Verizon and Comcast. All because of a bad decision by the Bush-era FCC. We have a pro-industry FCC Chairman who is terrified of making a decision, conducting back room dealmaking, and willing to sit on his hands rather than reassert his agency's authority. We have a president who promised to "take a back seat to no one on Net Neutrality" yet remains silent. We have a congress that is nearly completely captured by industry. Yes, more than half of the US congress will do pretty much whatever the phone and cable companies ask them to. Add the clout of Google, and you have near-complete control of Capitol Hill.
A non-neutral Internet means that companies like AT&T, Comcast, Verizon and Google can turn the Net into cable TV and pick winners and losers online. A problem just for Internet geeks? You wish. All video, radio, phone and other services will soon be delivered through an Internet connection. Ending Net Neutrality would end the revolutionary potential that any website can act as a television or radio network. It would spell the end of our opportunity to wrest access and distribution of media content away from the handful of massive media corporations that currently control the television and radio dial.
So the Google-Verizon deal can be summed up as this: "[b]FCC, you have no authority over us and you're not going to do anything about it. Congress, we own you, and we'll get whatever legislation we want. And American people, you can't stop us.[/b]
This Google-Verizon deal, this industry-captured FCC, and the way this is playing out is akin to the largest banks and the largest hedge funds writing the regulatory policy on derivative trading without any oversight or input from the public, and having it rubber stamped by the SEC. It's like BP and Halliburton ironing out the rules for offshore oil drilling with no public input, and having MMS sign off.
Fortunately, while they are outnumbered, there are several powerful Net Neutrality champions on Capitol Hill, like Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Henry Waxman, Jay Rockefeller, Ed Markey, Jay Inslee and many others. But they will not be able to turn this tide unless they have massive, visible support from every American who uses the Internet --- whether it's for news, email, shopping, Facebook, Twitter --- whatever. So stop what you're doing and tell them you're not letting the Internet go the way of Big Oil and Big Banks. The future of the Internet, and your access to information depends on it.
Author's note: Notice how a company can change their tune in the name of profitmaking. From Google in 2006: "Today the Internet is an information highway where anybody - no matter how large or small, how traditional or unconventional - has equal access. But the phone and cable monopolies, who control almost all Internet access, want the power to choose who gets access to high-speed lanes and whose content gets seen first and fastest. They want to build a two-tiered system and block the on-ramps for those who can't pay."
Josh Silver, President, Free Press[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article26104.htm[/url]
As soon as companies start realizing they can start making more money doing this, you're going to start seeing this with other providers and in other countries. The Internet needs to take a stand, now.
The internet won't cease to exist because a company wants to make money off increasing the speed on their sites.
So they're selling better internet for more money
So they're doing exactly what you'd expect them to do
BlACK POWER! :Fists:
[QUOTE=EliteGuy;23885150]The internet won't cease to exist because a company wants to make money off increasing the speed on their sites.[/QUOTE]
It will never be the same.
Oh noesss
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;23885177]It will never be the same.[/QUOTE]
So they're following the logical course of action
Okay, so it's "You can come to our site faster for more money, or you could just stay on your current connection and speed."
They can't legally make it slower to choice connections.
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;23885177]It will never be the same.[/QUOTE]
Yes it will, you're blowing this way out of proportion. Sure it's bullshit but it doesn't stop us from doing anything.
Come monday.....
absolutely nothing will happen.
[QUOTE=Uberman77883;23885225]Come monday.....
absolutely nothing will happen.[/QUOTE]
Exactly.
It pisses me off so much that people are making totally false claims.
Read the Bloomberg article, NYT is totally wrong.
[url]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-04/google-verizon-are-said-to-have-reached-deal-on-how-to-handle-web-traffic.html[/url]
[quote]
The compromise as described would restrict Verizon from selectively slowing Internet content that travels over its wires, but wouldn’t apply such limits to Internet use on mobile phones, according to the people, who spoke yesterday and asked not to be identified before an announcement.
[/quote]
Pfff
The internet ''as we know it'' won't be gone on monday.
I don't think it's as detrimental as that article makes it sound. I probably wouldn't have even known or noticed had I not found this thread.
This doesn't directly affect the internet at all. If it affected the internet it would be happening all over the world. This is just simply just a few things that could possibly lead to some things in America costing more / being limited.
Wait, since when is charging more for a better product a "doomsday scenario"?
Well shit.
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;23885117][URL]http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article26104.htm[/URL]
Fuck Google. As soon as companies start realizing they can start making more money doing this, you're going to start seeing this with other providers and in other countries. The Internet needs to take a stand, now.[/QUOTE]
You don't own the internet. Service providers can charge whatever the fuck they want for their services and do whatever the fuck they want with it.
This is the most fear mongering piece of shit thread ever.
Huffington Post is a worse source than The Onion by the way.
[QUOTE=Killowatt;23885263]Wait what
I don't get it[/QUOTE]
this
Oh my god it's soylent green all over again!
[QUOTE=EliteGuy;23885150]The internet won't cease to exist because a company wants to make money off increasing the speed on their sites.[/QUOTE]
You know, once they've been given an inch, it's all that much easier to take a mile.
:foxnews::siren:[b]THE INTERNET AS WE KNOW IT WILL END ON MONDAY[/b]:siren::foxnews:
[QUOTE=Sonicfan574;23885374]this[/QUOTE]
From what I've read, they will charge you more money for a 3-10 second difference on an individual site. I don't really see anything wrong with it, unless if that individual site made it ridiculously slow for users that are on the default payment.
Someone explain this better to me. In my understanding, they are saying that if you want faster internet you pay more? Don't we do that already?
[QUOTE=xxncxx;23885617]Someone explain this better to me. In my understanding, they are saying that if you want faster internet you pay more? Don't we do that already?[/QUOTE]
The idea is, big (shitty) websites get priority over smaller ones, you get to access them faster if you shell out the extra cash. The highest form of this would be turning internet service into cable TV, paying for access to certain websites in a tiered system. To get to that though, they need to take baby steps, like this. All irrelevant though, the source is shit.
Draaaama
So its like, "Hey a lot of people go to Youtube, why don't we make a faster connection speed for those who pay for it so they can watch videos faster! But those who don't will have to stick with the same speed their ISP gives them."
[editline]10:26PM[/editline]
At least that's what I am getting.
[QUOTE=xxncxx;23885701]So its like, "Hey a lot of people go to Youtube, why don't we make a faster connection speed for those who pay for it so they can watch videos faster! But those who don't will have to stick with the same speed their ISP gives them."
[editline]10:26PM[/editline]
At least that's what I am getting.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but it's the implications of even allowing faster access to the websites that can afford to pay the ISPs for the service.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
