Net neutrality in danger?

[harvey danger]

I'm surprised nobody's mentioned this here.

http://ipower.ning.com/netneutrality2

Bell Canada and TELUS (formerly owned by Verizon) employees officially confirm that by 2012 ISPs all over the globe will reduce Internet access to a TV-like subscription model, only offering access to a small standard amount of commercial sites and require extra fees for every other site you visit. These 'other' sites would then lose all their exposure and eventually shut down, resulting in what could be seen as the end of the Internet.

Dylan Pattyn *, who is currently writing an article for Time Magazine on the issue, has official confirmation from sources within Bell Canada and is interviewing a marketing representative from TELUS who confirms the story and states that TELUS has already started blocking all websites that aren't in the subscription package for mobile Internet access. They could not confirm whether it would happen in 2012 because both stated it may actually happen sooner (as early as 2010). Interviews with these sources, more confirmation from other sources and more in-depth information on the issue is set to be published in Time Magazine soon.

At first I wasn't entirely sure that this was something to be worried about (I don't take Tania Derveaux seriously), but if a journalist from Time Magazine is writing about it, it may be. Am I wrong, is this something everyone here knows is a hoax or something? Honestly, such a plan by corporations wouldn't surprise me if true.

What should/could/would we do to prevent it?


P.S. I figured the social implications of the issue warranted a post in general, but if the mods think it belongs somewhere else, feel free to move it.

[Lexx]

Sounds like bollocks to me. The digg link fuels my suspicions.

[harvey danger]

Sounds like bollocks to me. The digg link fuels my suspicions.

What parts about it fuel your suspicion?

The one post about so many companies relying on the internet makes sense, but I would imagine that they would have a separate service from regular consumers.

As for the thing about other ISPs, I don't know if they'd really be big enough (or have a large enough network) to support themselves or that many people all jumping on board, or what. I don't know much about business, but I imagine that the other companies could possibly bully them, too.

[Lexx]

The main reason I just don't think it's possible. They'd need worldwide support from every government (most of which claim to want to make the web more accessible, UK government says they want every family to have access by 2xxx, for example), web host and company to make such dramatic changes to how the worlds greatest and largest communication medium. They'd also need every ISP in on it too, if just one provider offers a normal service, the others'll get fuck all and the other will gain a monopoly of any customers with an ounce of sense. It's just something that's impossible to pull off and quite frankly the whole idea stinks of a ridiculous conspiracy.

Even if true, it'll just be seen through as a shallow attempt to gain control and profit of the internet. It'll fail.

[Torp v2.0]

The net will survive. Hordes of users will raise themselves in rebellion if anybody tries this, change to the least restrictive ISPs available, and anyone who's not in the "standard" package will flee the country.

That's my prophecy, at least.

[Cerapter]

Ridiculous.

[Lexx]

Oh, I forgot to add a big "[citation needed]" to this, they say all these companies and people said this and that but.. where's the evidence? They expect us to go by their word? To be fair, I think the people that posted this are probably suckers themselves rather than the instigators.

I'll believe it when I see it.

[Lysix]

i'm surprised they haven't started taxing us on the air we breathe by now.

[Kråhffäh]

Without the net we probably wouldn't have found MaSu..

They're playing with fire.

[Viherminttu]

I don't think it'll happen. It's too unbelievable. Too many users to cause an uproar.

[Annie]

The internet can't end really, 90% of the population, and not just net addict geeks like us, depend on it. For lots of things. I'm not too worried, at all.

[harvey danger]

The internet can't end really, 90% of the population, and not just net addict geeks like us, depend on it. For lots of things. I'm not too worried, at all.

But how many people would just accept it, specifically the non-geeks?

I wonder what the ratio of non-geek to geek on the internet is.

[Annie]

The internet can't end really, 90% of the population, and not just net addict geeks like us, depend on it. For lots of things. I'm not too worried, at all.

But how many people would just accept it, specifically the non-geeks?

I wonder what the ratio of non-geek to geek on the internet is.

Not many? You know that like so much shit depends on the net. It's made life easier for a kagillion people. You don't need to be a geek to love/need the internet.

[harvey danger]

The internet can't end really, 90% of the population, and not just net addict geeks like us, depend on it. For lots of things. I'm not too worried, at all.

But how many people would just accept it, specifically the non-geeks?

I wonder what the ratio of non-geek to geek on the internet is.

Not many? You know that like so much shit depends on the net. It's made life easier for a kagillion people. You don't need to be a geek to love/need the internet.

But look at cable. The entire nation is now being forced into it, and only a small percentage of households make due with basic cable. Even more people watch TV than do use the internet.

[Viherminttu]

Cable TV here was a big deal because it was 100% no advertisements. Now there are commercials constantly, not just for other shows but for cleaning products, phone sex lines, etc. People never kicked up a stink, and everyone still gets it anyway.