Does this mean it is for real?

    Shit like this really makes it feel like the world is going backwards. Kinda in the same way that it feels like Internet speeds, or how much you get for your money, have significantly stopped increasing the last couple of years (at least here).

    It's funny because it feels the opposite here in the UK, with internet speeds increasing at a rate of about 20mb/s per year for the past several years (obviously only in major areas but quieter parts are getting faster at a lower rate). In fact, the rate of progress here has gone way beyond my expectations. There was a recent controversy about filtering UK internet, but in reality that's turned out to be a bit of a non-event and is only really an issue for those who don't pay the bill — but then parents have always had the option of filtering their kids' internet if they really want to, although that's not really something I believe in.


    I'm not sure how it is in the US, but I've had the distinct impression from talking to people on IRC that the web infrastructure is pretty bad over there and fibre isn't nearly as common as it is in many other countries. Maybe that's also part of the problem: either a reluctance or an inability to make serious technological strides in tandem with the rest of the world (bizarre when you think about where a lot of the internet's biggest players come from), forcing them into borderline draconian measures like this to keep things running in the face of a vast capacity issue they're not keen to talk about. I guess the US's sheer size doesn't help either.

    You'd be correct in that the web infrastructure in the states is a bit of a mess. You can certainly have access to fast speeds and fibre (where it is available anyway, mostly in newer developments where the infrastructure is easy to install) but the pricing is absolutely ludicrous, and it doesn't help that your choice of ISPs is extremely limited and essentially non-competitive.

    Hopefully enough people will get annoyed and get interested in net neutrality as a result but I'm not really sure that will happen until the ISPs start charging extra for everyone to access their favorite services, at which point it will be somewhat ingrained into their business models, at least with the big name providers. If this means a bunch of smaller, competitive ISPs form and signals the death of the dominant corporate ones, I certainly wouldn't complain.

    Quote from e-freak

    Everything else is stored within these servers. Especially the Amazon and Google Cloud are probably hosting 60% of today's internet. Even if you try "and host it yourself", a lot of the space you can rent easily is in the Amazon cloud.


    We only need 1% of people hosting their own content to send them a message. Also you can start to be your own provider. I read some search on it and I might start to provide internet myself and host my own content. You don't need neither a powerful machine nor terabytes of space.

    Quote from Seldoon182

    We only need 1% of people hosting their own content to send them a message. Also you can start to be your own provider. I read some search on it and I might start to provide internet myself and host my own content. You don't need neither a powerful machine nor terabytes of space.


    Kinda missing the point. Your own hosted content will be put on the slow lane just as everything else where the isp's and their partners don't make an extra buck from.

    When you think that google is used by 90% of the world (using internet, people with money in fact), and that it is possible for them to store and process all the search data by ip, country, previous searches etc..


    With statistical tools they can know pretty much in real time what the whole world, by country, social class etc... has on their mind.


    I find this absolutely scary. In all history, the fact that an institution has access to this kind of omniscient information never occurred by technological means before.


    Just imagine the potential of these informations on a global market that works by anticipation of offer and demand. It is just too big to not be used. Because you look at that inoffensive search bar, and you tell yourself, after all who care about what i search on internet, i don't have anything to hide.


    Internet is free, based on the individual level, but this is pretty much the trick of it. But at least on the positive note, you still have to trick people by giving them a service. Much dystopian, very globalized, wow

    I want to do something about this, I signed all the petitions and that stuff - but what else can I do? Anyone got ideas? I feel helpless and angry about this.

    Quote from Sjonsson

    I want to do something about this, I signed all the petitions and that stuff - but what else can I do? Anyone got ideas? I feel helpless and angry about this.

    You can start thinking like them, and then acting accordingly. Signing petitions won't do anything, I'm sure.

    Quote from Thrik

    There was a recent controversy about filtering UK internet, but in reality that's turned out to be a bit of a non-event and is only really an issue for those who don't pay the bill


    Are you serious? I wouldn't call enforced state censorship "a bit of a non-event". You just need to look to China to see where that can lead.

    Quote from Sentura

    You can start thinking like them, and then acting accordingly. Signing petitions won't do anything, I'm sure.

    Yeah that's about how far I get in terms of actions too, but no I'd rather stay angry.

    A few thoughts...


    1) Unless I am mistaken, aren't most residential broadband connections in the US via cable? (Ie, not phone lines/DSL) Assuming that is true, the cable operators (Verizon, ATT, Comcast, Time Warner etc.) are the ISPs. Right?


    2) Don't the big ISPs in #1 literally own those residential cable lines (and many commercial too) that connect said residences to the internet backbone?


    3) Most population centers in the US feature very few choices for cable companies (ie, ISPs) so it's mostly monopolies or duopolies.


    4) Don't "small" ISPs have to lease capacity on cable lines that are owned by the big companies in #1?


    5) So aren't the big ISPs in control anyway?


    6) Now what? Or is this logic complete bullshit?


    Anyway, I am very curious how in the near term this could impact big online games (LoL, Dota 2, every big console shooter, etc. etc.) "Oh you want to try out that new Titanfall game? You can get a 5000 ms ping for free, 50 ms ping for just $5/month or a 15 ms ping for $20/month."


    I'm not sure I see that coming, but you know there are suits in rooms trying to figure out how to make that happen.

    I must be lucky then. Here in Finland I haven't heard about capped bandwidths for broadband connections (the max. GB you can down/up before paying more for it). I have 10GB limit for my phone though, which requires some effort to get it all used up.

    Quote from marks

    Are you serious? I wouldn't call enforced state censorship "a bit of a non-event". You just need to look to China to see where that can lead.I know where it could lead, and I've vocally opposed the idea whenever I've had the opportunity — including via correspondence to the Government. But as it stands, unless you're using an internet access point that you have no authority over (e.g. in a coffee shop or when you're a kid), any and all UK filtering is trivial to disable (no underground methods needed).

    While I'm no fan of censorship, I'm also no fan of hyperbole. It's important to be clear that the state isn't currently imposing mandatory filtering — the state is completely OK with you not using the filtering because it's aimed at making the web a 'safe for kids by default' environment. And as long as it stays that way I do consider it a small issue. After all, my web activity hasn't been affected at all.

    Quote from Thrik

    I'm not sure how it is in the US, but I've had the distinct impression from talking to people on IRC that the web infrastructure is pretty bad over there and fibre isn't nearly as common as it is in many other countries.

    I guess the US's sheer size doesn't help either.


    Yeah, in their defense, it is a big ass country to cover! Still doesn't give them the right to want to dip their hands on other businesses money. I don't understand why they would even want any of that money other than obvious utter greed!


    Dont forget


    Azure

    Rackspace


    The way it works in Canada (I'm fairly certainly it's similar in America) is that there is a law in place that forces the owners of the cable to sell bandwidth to 3rd party providers at a bulk rate. Those providers then resell it to the consumer. Supposedly the bulk rate allows the 3rd party to compete but the reality is probably close to an oligarchy colluding to keep standards at a certain place.


    We did for the longest time have a bunch of legal stuff preventing foreign companies from coming in and genuinely competing, they are finally allowed in. Hopefully in the future it will begin to have an effect on the market.


    Online games They could certainly discriminate by server. Maybe some games would have to go back to a peer-to-peer model so ISP's can't discriminate by IP (discriminating by traffic type is ultimately an effort in futility). Heh maybe fighting games will start to get really popular again.


    EDIT: I forgot to mention I already DO pay a premium to have a better ping for games from my ISP. It's an extra 15$ a month. Not quite the same because to the best of my knowledge they aren't nerfing anything explicitly. Who knows though.


    I've tried to switch to a new company that's opened in Vancouver that is wiring their own fiber optics, I'm even willing to pay for installation (which should be really expensive) but the major company here keeps blocking them from expanding outside of new condominiums.

    One thing some places have done is the local city governments have started up their own ISPs. Since the city government can't "go out of business" the municipal service acts as a baseline; since it's cheap the private ISPs have to bump their service to a higher quality to get people to pay for the better service. Santa Monica recently rolled out free wifi that covers most of the central city, and they have their own fiber network (which I think is just for businesses/office complexes at the moment but I imagine it will be expanded to residential areas eventually).


    But of course lots of places like Texas made it explicitly illegal for city governments to sell broadband, because freedom or something.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!

Register Yourself Login