It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Devolution Of The Internet And Control Of Information

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2017 @ 11:36 PM
link   
The best days of the internet are over once you could ask a search engine a specific question and get a specific answer now you get pages of advertising before any answer.You could also ask for show me more like this now you only get to see whos paid to get to the top,a lot of you tube is now becoming pay per view and it is now actively censoring.Then theres the damn adds that follow you for days after you look something up theres no such thing as net neutrality everything is now sucked up into the cloud and if your not paying for it then you are the product.


edit on 16-12-2017 by khnum because: punctuation.




posted on Dec, 16 2017 @ 11:38 PM
link   
a reply to: khnum

Netscape has a thing called a private window. It means no cookies and no searches following you around.

But it does mean that you have to login to ATS everytime.



posted on Dec, 16 2017 @ 11:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Sounds like something I could use I have a HP which had Norton as an OEM install but I got a better deal with Avast,now Norton has somehow activated itself without my permission they better not try and send me a bill.



posted on Dec, 16 2017 @ 11:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

That was funny.



posted on Dec, 16 2017 @ 11:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: TheScale




if i wanted to just have internet from comcast my bill goes from $108 to $111.

Well that sucks. I have a choice of providers, one of which happens to be my TV cable provider. And I won't give up my phone landline because it works when the power goes out.

See what a local monopoly can do? I don't think the FCC's decision is going to help your situation. At all.


i agree. while i dont necessarily agree with how net neutrality worked it had a place in our current climate. id love to see more people pushing for a free and open market when it comes to isp's then laws like net neutrality and the rollback would be redundant. shoot if it just went the way the cell phone market is id be quite happy.



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 12:06 AM
link   
a reply to: TheScale




shoot if it just went the way the cell phone market is id be quite happy.

Title II sort of does that. But cell is a bit different because radio.



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 12:24 AM
link   
I think the devolution of not having net neutrality means the Internet turns back into AOL. And AOL failed.

It will really stink when your ISP charges you for downloading YouTube videos because they prefer to promote their own YouTube technology. Or they just want to gouge you for more money.

And then the ISP can just stop YouTube from being accessible at all on their own private network unless YouTube pays the ISP exorbitant fees.

The beauty of net neutrality is as a consumer I have a very well defined meaning to the word "Internet". But without net neutrality the "internet" suddenly becomes AOL again.

It's alright, a new Internet will rise having net neutrality because that is what sells. The AOL business model failed miserably in the marketplace. Any company not embracing net neutrality will eventually fail because they will not be able to control their own greed.



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 12:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Good one!



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 12:30 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015




It will really stink when your ISP charges you for downloading YouTube videos because they prefer to promote their own YouTube technology. Or they just want to gouge you for more money.

Possible, but the more likely scenario is that the big boys will charge YouTube (or ATS because of all the YouTube links) more which means that YouTube (or ATS) has to collect more advertising revenue or become a paid website.

You won't pay your ISP more, but you'll have to pay YouTube (or ATS).



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 12:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: Phage

Sounds like something I could use I have a HP which had Norton as an OEM install but I got a better deal with Avast,now Norton has somehow activated itself without my permission they better not try and send me a bill.



Netscape Navigator is a discontinued proprietary web browser,
which released in 1994.



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 12:45 AM
link   
a reply to: ADSE255

Thank you



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 12:46 AM
link   
a reply to: ADSE255

Sorry, I should have said Firefox.
Same thing as far as I'm concerned. But I'm old.



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 12:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Don't apologize. That made me laugh.



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 12:55 AM
link   
a reply to: ADSE255

So you knew what I meant.

Dick.

(no smiley for you)



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 12:56 AM
link   
a reply to: SpeakerofTruth
I want to see, in writing, where the plans for this tiered pricing and clear discriminatory practices are actually being drawn up. No, I don't want the speculation of the same media companies that have already admitted to lying to us, and have had no shame and admitting they will continue to do so and censor things anyways. I do not want their speculation offered up as the facts, I want to see the actual legal writing and policy text that says this is how tiered pricing is possible or who is ready and waiting to roll our such packages.

Because to be honest, the only thing I have been hearing is speculative fear mongering from not only big filthy rich institutions and corporations that many of us already are dissatisfied with to an extent, but from the Lying media companies of the new millennia as well.

The same kind of fear mongering that said our streets will flow with rivers of blood as the wild west explodes into our communities if we allow stand your ground laws and unrestricted use of Castle Doctrine. That did not happen at all. The Patriot Act was anything but Patriotic. In the same vein, I do not believe the Net Neutrality had anything to do with staying neutral. If they named it that to begin with, then you know they were actually screwing you without realizing it.

Politicians add pretty names so people do not question what is actually written. I am now questioning that and believe that the end of this double speak of a policy may lead to very good outcomes.
edit on 12-17-2017 by worldstarcountry because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 12:58 AM
link   
a reply to: worldstarcountry




I want to see, in writing, where the plans for this tiered pricing and clear discriminatory practices are actually being drawn up.

Heh. That's a good one.



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 01:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage
So then there is no such thing is there? How about the policy change that makes such eventualities a possibility? Do we have at least have that in writing that explains or can be interpreted as fitting the bill of facilitating our doom into this tiered pricing rumor/hoax?

For all we know the utility designation requires them to deliver a minimum 1GB downstream for prices starting at 35.00 ? Of course that speculation is about as valid as what I am hearing from the opposite spectrum.

Where are the facts though??? You usually have them at a moments notice. Anything off hand?



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 01:04 AM
link   
a reply to: worldstarcountry




So then there is no such thing is there?

I wouldn't say that. Since there is no requirement that such plans be made public your requirement is moot.



For all we know the utility designation requires them to deliver a minimum 1GB downstream for prices starting at 35.00 ?
The requirements of Title I of the 1934 Communications Act (as amended by the 1996 Telecommunications Act) are readily available for your perusal.

edit on 12/17/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 01:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage
So what did they say about internet bandwidths limits and throttling of speeds in 1934, just out of curiosity?? Whats that you say, it was replaced by the telecom act of 1996?? Well wtf does that say about internet speeds. I will go look it up now in fact, thanks for the lead!



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 01:10 AM
link   
a reply to: worldstarcountry




Whats that you say, it was replaced by the telecom act of 1996??

No. It was amended, not replaced.
If you read a current version of the 1934 Communications Act the amendments are included.
edit on 12/17/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
13
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join