The End of the Internet as we know it?

[ClakarEQ]

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060213/chester

A bit of a long read.

Some interesting thoughts though.

Get your torrents, hacks, warez, skypes, down now because you may not be able to get that service in the future.

Anyone who knows what a packeteer, juniper(peribit), <port sniffing hardware> already knows they could kill several services in a heartbeat (even if you encapsulate).

IMHO this just grows my hate for big biz lobbiests.

EDIT, lets not turn this into a Dem, Lib, Rep debate, I can certainly predict that but the "food" in that link is still worthy of discussion IMHO.

Sorry if this was something previously posted under a different link, I'd never seen the info before.

[Arlos]

Yeah, I saw a similar article on this the other day in the local paper. That paper added one piece of additional information as well: Google apparently has been buying up mountains of fiber optic backbone capacity, though it is not yet doing anything with it. The local analyst mentioned that from what he'd learned, one of the most likely applications was for Google to start setgting up wireless access points everywhere, in effect becoming an ISP as well as a search/advertising engine. I have a bunch of friends at Google, I'll see if I can learn anything that way, though if it's confidential, I'll probably get nowhere.

As for the big picture, it's really terrifying. Turning the internet into a giant money machine for the big telco companies would completely destroy everything it has come to embody, stand for, and provide. I was completely against that 1996 telecommunications act, and his signing it is one of my biggest disappointments with Clinton as president. That act gave birth to the modern ClearChannel and its ilk (among other things) which has led in large part to the complete homogination of radio around the country.

I truly hope that the telcos fail in their efforts to get this passed, but I'm not exactly hopeful. At the risk of bringing political parties into this, I honestly feel that just given the basic stances of the parties, that it's far more likely to get passed with a Republican majority in Congress than it would be with a Democratic one. I could be wrong, certainly, as there are plenty of lobbyists with their hands in the Demo party as well, but the Republican party certainly has a strong recent track record of giving Big Business anything and everything it wants, regardless of any potential repercussions.

-Arlos

[Diekan]

go go corporate greed!!!!!

BTW anyone write their congressman? I did.

[Lyion]

Never happen. It's less likely to happen with the GOP, than the Dems since they are the more libertarian group.

p.s. This bullshit has been circulating for ten years. There is nothing to worry about.

[Yamori]

This is one of those articles where spin really seems to mask the big picture. (I'll admit I skimmed it - so if I'm wrong, do tell).

One side of the story that they aren't talking about is that government regulation is holding back the progress of the internet on a large level.

This 'common use of phone lines' (which apparently also includes cable) that they uphold as being the boon of the internet, basically says that if a private company decides to build communication lines, they must allow ANY company to use their lines as well --- if I'm not mistaken.

That in itself is somewhat of a ridiculous proposition in this day and age, and communications companies that wish to have this restriction removed do so very legitimately.

Ie: if a company wants to create a new/better/improved form of telecommunication for solely internet use, if THEY decide to raise the capitol to invent/develop/complete it, other companies will have the legal 'right' to use their lines without having to pay them for it. This makes any serious leaps in innovation nearly not worth it, as the profit rewards for doing so will be sliced considerably.

It's obvious that this cramps and stifles innovation in serious ways, leading to a generally shitty state of US networks overall, compared to other major industrialized nations at least.

It's true that more privitized lines can create some problems... but we are already at the point where we have several choices for internet access, and people are already quick to say 'fuck comcast, I'm getting DSL'. As the internet grows, so will connection options - there isn't a good chance that a company would be able to get away with content control stupidity for long... as competition will make short work of that.


Again, maybe I didn't read the article closely enough, and I'm not very knowledgable on this topic, so I could be wrong on the technical details. If I am, ignore me np;p

If there is an 'end to the internet', it's much more likely to come from government control, rather than government de-control.