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.

 

NET NEUTRALITY: A look at your ISP in months to come...

page: 8
84
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 24 2010 @ 06:27 AM
link   
reply to post by fixer1967
 


I just read your comment about the internet and what it was, and all I can say is "Wow." You blew my mind..




posted on Dec, 24 2010 @ 11:45 PM
link   
Good post. Not to discredit you or anything, this image is a few years old and I seen it on a site explaining European internet restrictions that were going to be upcoming in 2008.



posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 06:02 AM
link   
I agree with hotbakedtater in that many people will just walk away from their machines. I would like to see them implement this. Get it the he(( out of the way now. I envision millions just going without their computer for just one day. Personally, I would have to go through withdrawals for a day or two but it would be worth it in the long run. This would chap their ass' big-time. But the secret is having the maximun of the consumers doing without and not playing into their hand. Bring it on you big bully's!



posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by synaptic
Net neutrality is a good thing. It means everyone is treated equally on the net.

Right-wingers hate it because is stinks of "socialism omg!"

But if you want to set up a small blog you get equal treatment to a giant like Microsoft.

This FCC ruling is good for phone-line broadband.

Unfortunately thanks to Google, wireless cell phone broadband will NOT be neutral, meaning corporate favoritism.


7 pages and the first non-bollocks post!
Thank you, thank you, thank you.
Also congratulations.

Edit to add: The idea is not to charge you extra for site X
The Idea is to charge you extra if you want your site to be transmitted as fast as Mr. Murdochs. And for some wierd reason Mr. Murdoch doesn't mind paying the company he owns money for the better service.
edit on 25-12-2010 by debunky because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by CanadianDream420
 


this will just add to the growing tensions: like wikileaks these hackers the body scanners local police towers and more. its just going to come toether and spark something big.



posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 03:39 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 07:58 AM
link   
Ok where did you get this pic from and how did it get this many pages without a source??

If it's in the many pages could you direct me to it?

I don't see people paying for this crap. It's BS and do these people really need MORE money!

The only thing I use is the internet. It's suppose to be a source of free information but then again if they can make a profit off of it they will...

I will not pay for tiered internet service esp the crap service. If I were to pay for it then I expect 24/hr support and NOTHING to go down or harm my computer otherwise they can stick their fees where the sun doesn't shine



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


Originally posted by hotbakedtater
This will backfire. Millions of net users, like me, will simply walk away if these type of money grubbing tactics come into play. Big Business already makes me sick, I will be damned if they get a single extra penny out of me for using the web.

We will see an upsurge in magazines and book sales, once they start rolling on the greed.


It would be great if this happened. Unfortunately, most people do not have a choice with regards to high speed service in their area. These corporations waited to act until the web has become an important tool for many Americans.

Giving your money to book and magazine publishers ultimately funnels up to the same monopolies. We as a society may actually have to leave our homes and find entertainment elsewhere. Use your libraries. Of-course they track everything you do there (as they do in our homes), but we've already paid for these services.

I wish people would rise up in mass and practice civil disobedience. The first thing we need to do is end co-operation with this unholy income tax.
edit on 26-12-2010 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Good, if people start droping the internet, maybe they will have money for a gun then. Won't this just cause more anti-government sentiment?



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 12:41 AM
link   
reply to post by CanadianDream420
 


I believe net neutrality is very comparable to an over-regulated socialist economy.

Why are we preaching net neutrality when we are a capitalist society? Shouldn't those who are successful be privileged to buy what space they want?

It goes hand in hand with this whole Obama 'spread the wealth deal'. Spreading the wealth has been proven to be FATAL to economies; just research the 1970 winter in England.

Net neutrality is evening the playing field, which sounds nice, but those who are well versed in economic thought, know that incentive is vital. Without incentive, companies have no reason to increase profits and make our economy hum.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 01:34 PM
link   
I see a few posts of people saying they will not use the net if tptb try this but guess what? That's exactly what they want people to do. If you have to pay for the websites you wish to visit, you can bet you will not be able to visit websites like ATS or anything else that conflicts with the elites ideals. They must love how easy it is to manipulate the average person into doing exactly what the elites want, and make the average person think it was their own idea. They hate the internet because they cannot control and manipulate the flow of information between us like newspaper and television. There has been discussion on the internet of how tptb wanted an internet kill switch. Now they seem to have a different much more subtle strategy. Then again it could just be good old fashioned greed, but I'm of the opinion it is both. People call it paranoid, I call it I'm not stupid. Best line ever



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 03:33 PM
link   
This is really scary and deserves much more main stream attention.

I wish there were better options then write a letter to the FCC or cancel your internet to boycott your ISP. Both solutions dont seem like they would help much. hopefully a big company like google who openly fights for net neutrality against the FCC will open up avenues for people to contribute to the cause.
edit on 27-12-2010 by konsumed because: mispelling



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by SWCCFAN
Well This is a start. Now that they have taken that first inch they will not stop.


While a disagree with a dumb-@ss pronouncement that capitalism is a panacea of some sort, I do believe that it will work its magic this time.

There is tons of bandwidth in this country. A smart person would buy lots of dark fiber and charge a flat fee for all. And become a billionaire in the process.


Or start up an internet insurance company for those who may fall victim of WIFI theft etc.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Rezwar
 


I think you're off with your comments. I don't think it has anything to do with shutting the internet down. Just has to do with companies seeing dollar signs and a potential for more profit. They will not get it from me.



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 06:40 PM
link   
If my United States Amendment - 1 gets taken away, I'm going to use United States Amendment - 2 to get United States Amendment - 1 back.



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 07:07 PM
link   
One good thing about big business is that they are so slow on the take up.
If they ever do get so steeped in the internet and make people pay for things they currently get for free, I guess
it will be the end of their business model too.
Seems they don't take on board was has happened to the movie and music business.
People won't sit back and be ripped off. Or in the past they have, but now the internet has leveled the playing field.

If they don't realise by now that net users are very clever, sophisticated and free minded people, I guess they'll have to learn the hard way.

And as for Youtube, I already have to put up with annoying adverts playing before the video runs, that is about as much intrusion as I'm willing to put up to get it for free.
Any of this bundling crap and they can go to hell.
There are plenty of other sites where you can upload videos, so if I was Youtube I'd be very careful.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Net neutrality is great. It stops corporations from getting faster speeds than everyone else.

In this ruling, the FCC has maintained net neutrality for wired internet. So that's good.

Wireless is open game for corporations. So that's bad.

The main people against net neutrality are right-wing fascists like Fox News and Alex Jones.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   
I really can’t see this working, if Google start to charge me £40 a month for their services i will go elsewhere, with a massive crowd of consumers right alongside me. If they start charging some clever sod will eventually set up a rival website that does it all for free with a few advertisements in a side bar. The way I see it the internet as it is just now is beneficial to both the consumers and the service providers, if they were to go a. with this it would only take one ISP to stick to the ways of old and as a result they would steel everyone else’s customers.

In a system like the one the OP has depicted i would imagine that Google and yahoo would be in the cheaper category, if not remain free. There is another problem with this, it wouldn’t take long before software became available on the internet to bypass paying to use any of these services. I would also imagine that doing this would really annoy large hacker communities who would do their collective best to prevent this from happening.

Then there are the numerous companies that rely on net neutrality, take Amazon and Ebay for example they wouldn’t benefit if their customers had to pay a fee to their ISP to use Amazons services, they would probably lose customers as well if the customers have to pay to use a search engine. Then advertising agencies would start paying less to the companies that charge as their visitor numbers fall this could result in an overall fall in profits.

It seems to me this is the capitalist machine trying to conquer the internet, it will never happen, the people will not let it. This would cost too many too much for very small gains with very big steps backwards.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by c1172558
Net neutrality is great. It stops corporations from getting faster speeds than everyone else.

In this ruling, the FCC has maintained net neutrality for wired internet. So that's good.

Wireless is open game for corporations. So that's bad.

The main people against net neutrality are right-wing fascists like Fox News and Alex Jones.


I strongly disagree with you.

How does more metering and control give an even playing field? It doesn't! The even playing field is what we have right now. Google has to pay a lot to be this fast. They can, and do, so they have a large share of the net. That's fair. Anyone could come along and take over, provided they win the people over. How could this get any better by catering to a few companies and letting the rest struggle to even be noticed by anyone on the metered systems?

BOO Net Nutrality!! BOOO!



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
I think people have no clue what NET NEUTRALITY is.

OP, you have got it all backwards. Net Neutrality is supposed to STOP the ISP's from doing what you suggest in your original post.

Either people didn't read about it, or they automatically oppose it because it's from the fed., but a majority of people have got net neutrality all backwards.

Net neutrality is to keep the internet FREE and OPEN. It is to disallow ISPs from censoring content, or making you pay per website like cable TV.

Some people don't want net neutrality because it puts restraints on ISPs, and they fear it wont stop there. But, net neutrality is a good thing, it means ISPs cant limit what websites you go to like ATS. It keeps the internet OPEN.

I think a good lot of you need to reread what net neutrality is about, and this time comprehend what it is saying.



new topics

top topics



 
84
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join