Save The Internet


Nova

Is that a Caanoo in your pocket or are you just ha
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
6,093
Age
34
Location
UK
Website
Visit site
I'll let the quotes speak for me:

Congress is pushing a law that would abandon the Internet's First Amendment -- a principle called "Network neutrality" that prevents companies like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast from deciding which Web sites work best for you -- based on what site pays them the most. Your local library shouldn’t have to outbid Barnes & Noble for the right to have its Web site open quickly on your computer.

Net Neutrality allows everyone to compete on a level playing field and is the reason that the Internet is a force for economic innovation, civic participation and free speech. If the public doesn't speak up now, Congress will cave to a multi-million dollar lobbying campaign by telephone and cable companies that want to decide what you do, where you go, and what you watch online.

This isn’t just speculation -- we've already seen what happens elsewhere when the Internet's gatekeepers get too much control. Last year, Canada's version of AT&T -- Telus -- blocked their Internet customers from visiting a Web site sympathetic to workers with whom Telus was negotiating. And Shaw, a major Canadian cable company, charges an extra $10 a month to subscribers who dare to use a competing Internet telephone service.


cad-comic.com said:
Basically this means that the large companies like Verizon and Comcocksuckingcast would have, at their discretion, the right to choose what web content loads quickest for you. And guess how that decision is made? That's what, whatever web content makes them the most money. And if a website doesn't pay their exorbitant fees? It could load up slower than dial-up. Or not at all.

Dreamt of starting an online business? Opening a t-shirt shop online, or putting our your artwork for others to see? Under this legislation you can kiss that shit goodbye, unless you're willing to fork over cash to the big communications companies so they'll allow your stuff to be seen.


http://www.savetheinternet.com/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That is really awful. That would like, destroy the internet.

I'm passionate about this sort of thing, and if this is fake I will blow your fucking head off.

Anyways, it will probably be one of those things that someone somewhere along the line finds really silly and doesn't allow it.
 
I havnt heard of this yet.
I dont want to belive it so i wont
but anyway:
solution - destroy the communications company = no one to sell the internet to.
That would also mean p2p programs are gone aswell.
 
Nova posted on Apr 25 2006 at 05:02 PM said:
I'll let the quotes speak for me:

Congress is pushing a law that would abandon the Internet's First Amendment -- a principle called "Network neutrality" that prevents companies like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast from deciding which Web sites work best for you -- based on what site pays them the most. Your local library shouldn’t have to outbid Barnes & Noble for the right to have its Web site open quickly on your computer.

Net Neutrality allows everyone to compete on a level playing field and is the reason that the Internet is a force for economic innovation, civic participation and free speech. If the public doesn't speak up now, Congress will cave to a multi-million dollar lobbying campaign by telephone and cable companies that want to decide what you do, where you go, and what you watch online.

This isn’t just speculation -- we've already seen what happens elsewhere when the Internet's gatekeepers get too much control. Last year, Canada's version of AT&T -- Telus -- blocked their Internet customers from visiting a Web site sympathetic to workers with whom Telus was negotiating. And Shaw, a major Canadian cable company, charges an extra $10 a month to subscribers who dare to use a competing Internet telephone service.


cad-comic.com said:
Basically this means that the large companies like Verizon and Comcocksuckingcast would have, at their discretion, the right to choose what web content loads quickest for you. And guess how that decision is made? That's what, whatever web content makes them the most money. And if a website doesn't pay their exorbitant fees? It could load up slower than dial-up. Or not at all.

Dreamt of starting an online business? Opening a t-shirt shop online, or putting our your artwork for others to see? Under this legislation you can kiss that shit goodbye, unless you're willing to fork over cash to the big communications companies so they'll allow your stuff to be seen.


http://www.savetheinternet.com/
Well im not American or Canadian and you can't tell me that the american government is in charge of the whole internet. Besides oyu americcan people believe in free thingeys and patriotism and liberty and internet pages that all have equal shares of bandwidth.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well if Tim (cad artist) believes it, then i do to. It's too cruel a joke to play so far away from April 1st.
 
It was bound to happen sooner or later, because everything today is commercial. The internet allowed (virtual) freedom to way too many people, and now they're closing the faucet. So far the Internet was in its infancy and they were 'beta testing' it if you will, and now the final product will no longer be 'free' for everyone. I'd say "people are not gonna stand for this", but hey, I would have said the same thing about wars, poverty, and corruption.

- Alex
 
Atleast i live in england.
but since tony blair is bush's bitch - well be in for it soon.
He'll recieve nasty words from me.
 
I hate governments, 'specially mine ... I also hate borders and any sense of national patriotism; it make everyone closed-minded :(

Bush jr does not reflect the image of myself, so it pains me that he (at least symbolically) represents all Americans :(

sorry.
 
Bush sucks lots and lots...of...stuff... My dad thinks hes all "smart" and all because according to him, he knows how to deceive the American public and so-called "get away" with it (some great values dad). America is screwed anyways...but at least it's better than China's government... I wouldn't be too stereotypical of America anyways, as while it's problems are made known to everyone, all countries have these problems as well, it's only that the media are paying attention on something else...
 
To anyone who's doubting this, this isn't new news. I was hearing about this months ago from a variety of sources. It's the real deal, and it's fucking bullshit.
 
Hmm.Interesting.

If you think about it, up and coming phone companies could capitalise massively by offering freedom of use, it would only be a matter of time before people boycotted the major companies.
 
How many of us would actually get up and do something about this? Besides angry e-mails towards CNN executives that get nowhere, by going to protests and such other things, that unfortunately do not get anywhere either. It seems to be a check mate in their favour. Quick, someone make a poll, are we doomed - yes or no!

- Alex
 
Twimfy posted on Apr 26 2006 at 06:09 AM said:
Hmm.Interesting.

If you think about it, up and coming phone companies could capitalise massively by offering freedom of use, it would only be a matter of time before people boycotted the major companies.
The problem is that most of those companies are leasing lines from the dominant telcos/ISPs in the area because it is prohibitively expensive to completely wire an area again. Since those up-and-coming telcos/ISPs are using the established company's lines, they're subject to whatever restrictions are placed on them by that company.

How do I know this? Because I'm currently working for such an ISP. The company I work for uses the Telus network to provide ADSL for our customers, and during Telus's recent labour dispute, they blocked a pro-union website (and a whole host of other sites that were hosted by the same company). We got a ton of calls about people who were unable to reach those sites, but we couldn't do anything because our "upstream provider" had blocked them.

So basically, the only way for a new company to get around this is to run its own lines, and nobody will do that because they'd have a bitch of a time making that money back.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dark fibre would seem the best choice for saving the internet were this to happen. There is a lot of it, much more than the telecomms companies need, and it is available to anyone who can put up the cash. Plus, there are no line rental restrictions.
 
Well, they have a lot of the backbone, or could you say brains, of the architecture, or so I hear. They don't own it, but they have a theoretical control over it, and this control they may end up using after all these years.

Wars will not be fought for patches of land, nor gold or inventions, but the control of the Internet. :p
 
Back
Top