Save the internet.

[WatchMaker]

First off, I want to point out that yes, this is a thread to the popular topic of Net Nuetrality. If your not willing to get allittle political in order to discuss the future of the US, then advoid this thread. Some of you may or may not know about www.savetheinternet.com, but it is a site devoted to supporting Net Nuetrality. Honestly, that website can exlpain the concept much better than I can, but I will try to nutshell it for everyone.

Freedom on the internet is known as Net Nuetrality. This means what you say and do on the internet is entirely up to you. (With -some- limits of course.) However, just semi-recently, big companies like AT&T have been trying to lobby' congress into passing a bill that revokes Net Nuetrality. If this bill is passed, your ISP can controll your internet to their liking. They can basically cut you off from any and all websites unless those websites pay them large ammounts of money. Like I said, visit the website, learn about it, take action.

What I see coming from this is one of two things. Either, the bill doesn't pass and alot of those big companies take the blow from throwing away so much money, or the bill does get passed, starting an online war. You have to agree with me when I say, the day some company takes down google, they will have about 500,000+ diffrent people pissed at them. And when something like that happens, illegal actions will be done, such as Black-hat hacking. The war will be very one sided, and once alot of those big companies crumble from all the bashing, who knows what will happen. We could find ourselves in a completely diffrent US of A. Personally, I say let it pass, it's about damn time the country got interesting.

PS: Yes, I know some of you all will say "Its unconsitutional, it will never happen." But our right to free speech has already been butchered enough, and sadly, money will always trump the law.

 

[Jaraeth]

It pains me to say, I agree. But not totally, I hate and despise drama, and the drama that *will* ensue if the bill gets passed. I do not support it. I figure, let the website owners determine the limit of "free speech", ie: whether they allow any and all topics, swearing & cussing, etc... It should be up to the website owners, and the viewers.

I'm not one for reading profanity as I can say what I want and get the point across without swearing, but... to each their own, I just do my duty and not visit websites that do allow lots of profanity. I also work for a hosting company as a Systems Administrator that houses lots and lots and lots of pr0n, as well as legitimate non-pr0n websites. Restricting the Internet, in the fashion being mentioned would destroy alot of the US' current young culture... it is a major thing.

Perhaps AT&T has the funds to carry out their threats of 'Net moderation... but many small ISP and hosting companies have no means to do so, and many have no inclination to do so. I'd be back to using them than using an ISP that is capable of it.

*sigh* So much is possible, and imppossible with current technology. Someone will develop that which is not yet done, and who knows. It's all about the flow of information though...

I say, if they restrict our 'net, then our banks better stop being allowed to trade the information about where I shop and spend my money.

~ Jaraeth

 

[Anduril]

This has so been the era when our rights have been under attack, of course I still look squarely at the Patriot Act and think: "This is what happens when a government takes advantage of a shaken, scared and angry population."

But that's off topic, as far as revoking net neutrality...it's a really sad thing. What would be next? A poorly argumented objection to opinion columns in newspapers because some might find the content not to their liking? Free Will, and the very idea of deciding how we, well, end up, is something that should be a right of every person, and not dictated by shams such as the proposal on Net Neutrality, right of self-determination and all that jazz.

Outside of the philosophical realm, it gets so muddy, and one could see conspiracy theories abound. Is this really somethign that was conceived by the government and then given the appearance of an idea from the big communications companies in order to exert a little more control? Is this a bid by big companies to try and aqueeze more money out of people by having them pay special access fees for content (e.g.: websites) that they have restricted? Since people are paying to access the companies services in accessing the itnernet, do they then have the right to block content that they deem inappropriate?
And please, if it's more "concerned parents" fretting over what junior is looking at over the internet, stop finger pointing and step up to the real parent plate. There's far more you can do in your own household to stop it than trying tocast a shroud over the entire population.

There's all sorts of questions to be asked, and probably nowhere near enough answers to be found as well
I for one, hope the bill comes across someones desk and they jsut start laughing so hard that they start to cry, then stop, read it, then start laughing again. It's a farce, and I for one fart in it's general direction.

 

[Sylvado]

I like to know where anyone has read a plan or comments about a plan to block site and allow others. This is about major carriers offering a higher bandwidth and guaranteed routing to their customers.

Search | com.com

 

[WatchMaker]

No offense, but it's just ignorant to say that a big company like that won't step on customers to just get more money. It's been done before, it's going to happen again.

 

[Jaraeth]

<goes off on another tangent>

Sylvado, you (and the article) are correct. Most companies do only have a desire to effectively manage their bandwidth to their customers, and their customers customers. Case in point, the company I work for provides bandwidth to many companies. Let's just say that I heard of MySpace's power outage's in LA before it was posted up on any webcomic or news journal, with the exception perhaps, of MySpace's own website. I work daily, with companies like Level3, Global Crossing, Limelight, Cogent, etc etc.

Most of these providers are in the bandwidth business. They provide my hosting company and our clients with dedicated circuits out to the 'net. No intervention is done to block content, period. The only times I've seen any of these providers take down a circuit is when we get a spam complaint or C&D (Cease and Desist) order, and the customer does not comply... they 'null route' the IP or whole circuit until the customer complies.

I do not dispute the article you linked, it is very forthright, and correct. However, there is also some hype I've seen floating around, about something AT&T is working on, which someone may know of a link, I'm just too lazy at the moment to look for it. A story is floating around about a "secretive" room at a AT&T facility where they monitor all traffic and filter out what they don't want, or direct certain things off to the Gov't and the NSA. For one, I remember reading the story on a reputable website, but... is it really true?

This story of AT&T and their secret room which only high ranking FBI & NSA officials are allowed to enter sounds like another conspiracy theory. I for one, am prone to changing my opinions on a whim... so *if* this thing with AT&T's "room" is true, and other providers are doing the same... then I think it stinks, and that aspect of "Net Neutrality" is what I am for... leave it alone, stop invading my privacy.

I am fully aware that I have no privacy. I went to dinner with friends, and spent $200 on dinner at a very posh restaurant for some very dear friends... it was not like more normal $30-$60 here and there spending, and my bank called me to verify it was me. They are watching, and considering I rarely use cash, it is my fault... but I'm accustomed to it... and I still hate it, yet I love it.

My point is, bandwidth is always an issue. Dialup users don't exist very much any more as everything these days is about high speed. Bandwidth has to be paid for, and the equipment to hookup additional circuits and lines to all the providers costs money. This equipment is very expensive, yet... home computers are getting cheaper and cheaper. Sometimes, I think people don't realize how expensive the bandwidth used across the net really is. I'm sure if my own internet server used as much bandwidth as I do at home, my bandwidth bill would be in the $100's of dollars. Yet, as high speed Internet is all the craze, we baulk if it's over $50.

We as a society have a few options: 1) pay your ISP for your download speed, and desire to download more and/or faster than your account is set for, or 2) charge the creator of the content an arm and a leg (beit individual or company), and 3) both end user and provider share the cost.

I'll take Option #3 for $50 Alex.

</rant>

~ Jaraeth

 

[Luciro]

Actually the direct routing will make only one thing easier in the long run.
Hacking.
Why? I don't need to explain it, but ahh well. We're already sold off to the highest bidder. I think all this will do is allow other companies who are failing in their attempts to use a service much like the google ads and take complete advantage of advertising and what we see.
You don't think it'll happen? It's already done so on a small scale. This is the point where when something will narrow, something else will broaden. So the felgercarb's going to hit the fan and hopefully finally all the farm cats will hiss and fly the ---- off.

 

[Jaraeth]

With WinXP supporting full service unix ports like MacOS and all *nix's do, it made hacking a heck of alot easier for Windows, and made hacking windows easier. Still... hacking will not go away. M$ or anyone else will provide a fast, more direct route, and "crackers" will find a way to intrude into your PC. The trick is to run a tight ship, and no one is risk-free. I'm not saying be paranoid, but even the most stout *nix system administrator will tell you never be lax with security: patch, update & upgrade. Keep a tight ship, and your *chance* of being attacked and being successfully compromised will lessen.

Users of Windows, Mac & all OS's need to update their OS's all the time. What you're 'net connection speed is, or how you're connected will have little impact. I get attacked by kiddies all time, beit my cable internet provider, or my colocated box sitting on a network with 7 different 'net backbones.

The issue, I feel that is more important, is 1) to make sure we get ip6 working on the net since many service providers are running out of IP addresses and doing everything they can to reclaim unnecessarily used ones, to give to those that do need them... 2) get internet service providers up to par with the demands (the mom-and-pop ISP I used to work for still had only one backbone provider, and their network was all 100mbit... it was it's own bottleneck)... and 3) get new standards and technologies moving (IPv6 & "Internet2").... and of course, make sure that during this time, 4) "Free speech" is kept alive, at least in the U.S.

Just my humble opinion though.

~ Jaraeth

 

[Anduril]

@ Jaraeth:

Somehow I pictured that being on your personal business card

 

[Jaraeth]

It is hehehe. I have quite a few quotes re: sysadmins that are true to my life/work hehe