The End of the Internet?

[kirpen]

Verizon, Comcast, Bell South and other communications giants are developing strategies that would track and store information on our every move in cyberspace in a vast data-collection and marketing system, the scope of which could rival the National Security Agency. According to white papers now being circulated in the cable, telephone and telecommunications industries, those with the deepest pockets--corporations, special-interest groups and major advertisers--would get preferred treatment. Content from these providers would have first priority on our computer and television screens, while information seen as undesirable, such as peer-to-peer communications, could be relegated to a slow lane or simply shut out.

Under the plans they are considering, all of us--from content providers to individual users--would pay more to surf online, stream videos or even send e-mail. Industry planners are mulling new subscription plans that would further limit the online experience, establishing "platinum," "gold" and "silver" levels of Internet access that would set limits on the number of downloads, media streams or even e-mail messages that could be sent or received.
READ THE REST HERE http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060213/chester

[Cornucopia]

This is a very scary (and very possible--to those naysayers) prospect. The only thing that calms me down about this is the very real fact that the market, if enlightened of all the ramifications (particularly of political abuses), won't go for it and it will die.

This isn't exactly a "If you build it, we will come" scenario. If it can't get close to reaching critical mass, it'll just be some costly premium service and regular Internet will chug along fine.

Scott

>>>>>>
edit: So don't let it.

[milatchi]

Guess I'll just have to go back to my old way of sending data: Smoke Signal.

[lordsmurf]

Would this essentially just be port control?

[kirpen]

Well after that big net debacle a few months ago where one cpmpany wouldnt let anothers customers get to parts of the net I can see it.

[Morse2]

Interesting read, kirpen!

Corporate greed in the US is nothing new, but this I think goes too far. Build it and we WON'T come - and they'll have some very expensive and useless cables on their hands. Serve 'em right to go broke for getting too greedy and forgetting that consumers won't buy things that are not in their interest!

Let's see now, what was that rent-a-view DVD competitor called - DIVX or something like that? This new business model will be about as successful.

Unfortunately before it fails, it could damage some successful businesses that really do meet consumer needs that we already have. Perhaps it would be best after all to head it off at the pass with a grass roots lobbying effort (even bought and paid for congresscritters have to pay attention when they get too many irate letters).

All the best,
Morse

[parallax1]

Without getting too political, you have to look at who's behind this website.....

With the current debate on the NSA wiretapping it seems now is a good time to scare people into thinking every corporation is evil and the only saviors are those on left (the far left) who really care about liberty and justice.


Of course, as the old saying goes...just because they're paranoid doesn't mean someone's not out to get them....

[lordsmurf]

I like THE NATION but I'll be first to agree it can stretch sometimes. Maybe even a lot of the time. There is always truth to what they say, but they could do without the Fox-like "scare old people" tactics in the writing style. At least it doesn't suck up to a political party, even if it does serve as the new outlet for one. At least it admits it, doesn't call itself "fair and balanced" with a wink and a nod.

So some of this may be true, but don't fall for the scare tactics.

[whitejremiah]

yea, ive heard rumors of SOME of this stuff, but honestly, i dont think if this was all actually introduced to the public that it would fly very well........can we say invasion of privacy?

[mats.hogberg]

This is not video related news - Moving you to off topic.
Please read the forum stickies before posting!

/Mats

[doppletwo]

If internet service providers were changed in that way I wouldn't pay for it.


I would just use nocharge.com and dialup or nothing at all.


It definately seems possible, since many ISPs don't allow Usenet anymore.

[MackemX]

is t isn't it?

[parallax1]

I'm sure most of it is possible, just unlikely. There are too many watchdog groups monitoring things like this and too many other companies waiting to take advantage of the situation to attract new customers. I'm glad though that they put it out there so that more people will watch for it.

[MeDiCo_BrUjO]

It is not the end of the internet because Al Gore still haven't said so.

[Doramius]

Looks like it'll be affecting DSL from the names of all the companies involved. All someone has to do is create a large private network and wire off on their own to major cities, after 10-15 years of it and the wall will come down for those communications companies to do something like that. It really isn't expensive to wire a city up with communications if you have a large enough customer base. Start out someplace like here in Las Vegas. Get a grant and some large investors and lease a spot on the power poles to run shielded lines throughout the city. If 100,000 people jump on board with a monthly cost of $25mo., you will be paid off in about 3 years. This is running a 10Mbps connection too. In a city with 2 million, its not hard to reach that capability. Your setback is you're only a local network and you have to start the same in other large cities and slowly grow. This gives me the 10-15 year timeline of killing the communication companies with a setup like this.

As much as the carriers could market a strategy like that, they'd be obsolete about as fast as technology regularly is.

[ozymango]

All someone has to do is create a large private network and wire off on their own to major cities, after 10-15 years of it and the wall will come down for those communications companies to do something like that.

Nobody rat me out, but I'm sending this note from my work computer. On a university campus. You know, universities with very heavy-duty Internet connections? Like the kind that started this whole world wide web in the first place?

Okay, I certainly can understand the concerns of the article, but c'mon, you'd think (from that article) that the "Internet" is what you see on TV in those bad ads for Comcast (it's Comcastic!). Anybody have a LAN connection in their college dorm? Or exchange papers with colleagues in other country? That's a huge part of the Internet. Not everybody is just downloading the latest Paris Hilton video! :P

[BJ_M]

im going back to using smoke signals

[anitract]

they could do without the Fox-like "scare old people" tactics in the writing style.

Funny, I thought that's exactly what a certain other non-fox-related party was known for. ^_^

Anyway, I don't think that what is being proposed is likely to fly...yet who knows? I'm going to make a broad generalization that most politicians/lawmakers are very ill-informed when it comes to technology and the ramifications their decisions have on the future. I wouldn't call it stupidity necessarily, but rather ignorance. Because of this, I have little faith in favorable backing when it comes to this and many other issues we are likely to see in our lifetime.

Maybe this comment is straying too political in nature. But that might just be where the battle for the internet ends up.

[Doramius]

im going back to using smoke signals

What's the upstream speed of that?