http://www.popsci.com/popsci/whatsne...cbccdrcrd.html

Companies want to take over the internet. Not just how you get there or your ISP, but what you do on the internet. The pages you visit, and the things you do, they want to charge us for all of it.

I say stop this! Now its just up to congress to decide and a law could be created by the end of this year. The lobbyists are on their way to persuade congress to vote in their favor. Something MUST be done!

Based on my experience from my corporate america class, this is nothing new, but at the same time this is just passing the limit! There is a line that separates things that are public and private, the internet is for the public to use for FREE!

__________________
Common sense isn't so common

2 things.

1) That is the most retarded thing I have ever heard....
2) Why is this in Astronomy?

__________________

oops, i didnt notice that i put this in astronomy, could someone move it? i thought i put this in BABB

__________________
Common sense isn't so common

Moved.

__________________
1·618033988749894848204586834365638117720309179805 76286213544862270526046281890244970720720418939113 74

Honestly, that has got to be the most retarded, asinine nitwit thing to do. They want to strangle startups when, in the beginning, they TOO were just startups. The telcoms are getting *paid* for a service. They already have their claws in everything else. Hey, why not charge for bandwidth for local TV stations and radio? Hell, they could convince the local power companies to lower the power on the antenna if the radio station doesn't pony up the extra $1000 a month for "premium" usage. It's unfreaking rediculous, and a pox on the Congressmen that let them do it!

[Edit] Removed a word so the Mods didn't have to

__________________
"4th Law of Modern Thermodynamics: Where Mihoshi is, Chaos Reigns." ~W. Hakubi
"Gun control is hitting your target; Recycling is reloading your brass." ~ Lex of Dirty Work.

I agree, before long your going to have to pay to do your own work...

__________________

Yeah. This is just so mind-boggling asinine that it's infuriating. "They" (Verizon, AT&T, etc.) claim companies like Google are getting a free ride, but those companies pay for bandwidth, too.

If companies like Google don't have the option of routing their data over other "pipes", then this isn't much more than outright extortion.

Many analysts argue that there´s a broadband surplus in the marketplace. It wouldn´t make sense to charge more for something that is idle.

__________________
What brings us together is stronger than what pulls us apart

I agree. thats what corporations do they charge us for stuff that they shouldnt.

__________________
Common sense isn't so common

"...If we fail to mount proper countering force to the lobbying of the giant telecommunications companies currently trying to shake down website owners in an effort to force us to pay through the nose so that our websites can open as fast as whoever can afford to pay their planned extorsionistic rates, the internet as we know it will be destroyed..." ---IAHF.com
See:
http://www.savetheinternet.com/

is this more to do with video streaming inwhich case getting Hollywood stars to protest would be a good idea.

__________________

Overhere, you pay more for faster connections, and with some providers you pay more if you want a larger download/upload quotum per month (fixed monthly price of course in that case). But those count for the whole internet. they do not offer packages with a part of the internet, or things like that.

However, there might be something into really cheap (sponsored) packages that allow you to view only a few sites. Fixed packages (say, wiki and hotmail ), or free choice. I wouldn't have problems with such packages, as long as a full internet access package does not become any more expensive.

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

USSR(state run "communism")systems or Unregulated capitalism systems, they both seem to try to destroy.

__________________

then i see the internet going community based. In melbourne we have a community based wireless "Internet". You register to become a node in the system and for a reasonable startup cost your up and running. The internet wont die there will always be those ready to recreate the wheel... for us the little people.

__________________
Man can't even create a simple worm, but can create gods by the dozen.

Even Beethoven had his critics..

e=mc2 ( energy=morning coffee x 2)

Its worse than that, the Internets dead.

I've got a couple of routers and a linux box at home, and some cable. Who wants to help me to start up another internet that doesn't suck?

__________________
"I worry that, especially as the Millennium edges nearer, pseudo-science and superstition will seem year by year more tempting, the siren song of unreason more sonorous and attractive." - Carl Sagan, 1995

What is wrong with the current one, Damburger, and how will your one be better?

__________________
Knowledge is a curse, but ignorance is worse

Simple. We simply don't let the spammers on.

__________________
And you, to whom adversity has dealt the final blow
With smiling [faces] lyin' to ye' everywhere ye' go
Turn to, and put out all your strength of arm and heart and brain
And like the Mary Ellen Carter, rise again.

Then perhaps you should better start with a new email system first

__________________
Knowledge is a curse, but ignorance is worse

Won't need one if we're selective enough about who we let in. *chuckle*

__________________
And you, to whom adversity has dealt the final blow
With smiling [faces] lyin' to ye' everywhere ye' go
Turn to, and put out all your strength of arm and heart and brain
And like the Mary Ellen Carter, rise again.

The current one is almost certainly going to be tiered so that big corporations with rubbish content can muscle out indivudually run sites with better content. The egalitarian principles on which is was founded are being thrown out the window so there will be little point to it.

You've got to understand that the powers that be view the internet simply as a means to sell us loads of useless crap. The whole global-community-where-everyone-has-a-voice thing is just an annoying side effect for them.

Now, we might need some nodes in Beligum. Are you in or not?

__________________
"I worry that, especially as the Millennium edges nearer, pseudo-science and superstition will seem year by year more tempting, the siren song of unreason more sonorous and attractive." - Carl Sagan, 1995

Count on me for a node in South America.

In fact, such a move by Verizon et al could only impair the US economic productivity, giving an advantage to foreign competitors [governments can always subsidize broadband - many cities in Brazil have free, government- sponsored, broadband]. It doesn´t look like a smart move.

__________________
What brings us together is stronger than what pulls us apart

You are assuming, Argos, that Brazil wouldn't follow the US path.

In the UK, most broadband comes from either BT or Telewest/NTL. Neither has yet but its garunteed they would if pressure came from America.

Not sure if this is link is allowed (its NSFW) but he does illustrate the power of the internet, in a sort of obscene way:

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=owned

__________________
"I worry that, especially as the Millennium edges nearer, pseudo-science and superstition will seem year by year more tempting, the siren song of unreason more sonorous and attractive." - Carl Sagan, 1995

Some towns in Vermont are actually offering free wireless access to people in range. I think Montpelier is one such town. I honestly don't mind paying the Telcoms for internet access, but I'm paying for a service that should be reliable and fast for the price I pay for it. Broadband will eventually be availible to everyone, I think. The world hasn't gotten any smaller, just more managable.

__________________
"4th Law of Modern Thermodynamics: Where Mihoshi is, Chaos Reigns." ~W. Hakubi
"Gun control is hitting your target; Recycling is reloading your brass." ~ Lex of Dirty Work.

We have yet to remove the bottlenecks in the "last mile" [the old copper infrastructure] to make (true) broadband universally available. It´s gonna take some time, because the costs are discouraging.

Damburger, I agree with you to a certain extent. However, I´m pretty sure that many countries would resist the pressure as much as they can, in hopes of gaining some advantage until the last domino falls. I think of places like China, India, Brazil, Russia...

__________________
What brings us together is stronger than what pulls us apart

All of which are too dependent on the US part of the internet to alienate the providers there.

Sadly many countries will shoot themselves in the foot to maintain that relationship.

__________________
"I worry that, especially as the Millennium edges nearer, pseudo-science and superstition will seem year by year more tempting, the siren song of unreason more sonorous and attractive." - Carl Sagan, 1995

I'm not in, Damburger. I'm quite happy with the Internet as it is, even with the weaknesses there are.

I have no idea what you are planning to do with some cable and some people here and there, when you need either satellites or ocean floor cables to get a worldwide community again. I think doing everything possible to improve the current internet, and supporting companies, governments or institutions that want to make a better one, is a way better move, than some futile small scale tinkering.
And I don't share your doom and gloom scenario. There are many corporations and people that have a serious interest in keeping the internet "free", not free in the monetary sense perhaps (it isn't in Belgium and in many other countries), but free like in freedom of speech, and freedom of enterprise. There are still small, individual efforts that grow rapidly and reach lots of people, and I don't see any indication that that is disappearing (I'm talking about democratic countries here). On the contrary, this seems to be increasing, as the buzzword Internet 2.0 indicates (never mind that it is a marketing concept, it does reflect an existing new Internet culture). Just look at how Kazaa or BitTorrent have reshaped the media (music, movie) market. These were individual efforts, not large corporations.

__________________
Knowledge is a curse, but ignorance is worse

As far as I know, China restricts some websites country-wide. So it seems they're already running their own limited access system. I thought I heard this from a Chinese BAUT member, but I'm not sure.

I'm happy with the current internet, I see no need for a new one. Better spam/virus control would be nice, but other than that I love it. Wikipedia has added so much value to the internet (and some frustration when you need a peer reviewed source ).

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

Except that they´re not doing it out of economic motivations. As for access/traffic costs I bet they´re very low in China, if charged at all.

__________________
What brings us together is stronger than what pulls us apart

It was not for economic motivations indeed (assuming that my claim is indeed correct and not a false memory of mine).

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

That's not what's going to happen, though...

* We, the ISP (let's say AT&T) subscriber, pay for the appropriate package in order to access the Internet at whatever speed we want. That's generally the way it is now, and that won't change.

* Large companies (let's say Google) pay for enough bandwidth to serve up their content at reasonable speeds to every visitor. That's generally the way it is now, and that won't change.

* Now, AT&T wants to put an extra obstacle in the road. Both the company and the customer have paid for reasonably speedy access to the Internet, but AT&T wants Google to pay them in order to get reasonably speedy access to AT&T's customers.

This is asinine on a number of levels:

1) AT&T's customers have already paid for reasonably speedy access to the Internet. However, if Google refuses to pay AT&T for "premium" bandwidth, AT&T's users aren't getting what they've already paid for.

2) Google essentially pays twice (more than twice, really, considering they'd have to pay each service provider individually for "premium" bandwidth) in order to make their content accessible at a reasonble speed.