The Net Neutrality argument is fairly nebulous for the average user but this image from a Reddit reader shows the effects of the law in a way everyone can understand. If you’re tired of paying tiered pricing for stuff like cable and Internet access, how would you like to pay tiered pricing for the websites you visit. Want to watch Hulu? Add $10. Need eBay, even for a month? $5, please.
While this is obviously a worst case scenario, this sort of bundling is a favorite pastime of most stream providers. For years voicemail was a privilege, not a right, and there are still grannies out there renting phones from the phone company. While month-to-month the costs might not seem like much, this sort of thing adds up to delicious profit. [via reddit]
I sure hope it’s a matter of time before this idea is laughed out of reality. Cause the very thought that some people think this is a good idea scares me.
Considering there are millions of websites that an ISP would have a hard time charging like this.
Yeah, your most popular sites like youtube, facebook, CNN etc could be “throttled” etc…
But just think how this would spur proxy development and encryption.
They really do think this kinda idea is great. That’s why uk wants to charge its road users £££ per mile traveled, as if they dont pay road tax already. Plus not to mention those are public roads OWNED by the public already.
Governments need to keep their paws off the internet. The end result will eventually be governments telling you what you can and can’t do on the internet. No thanks.
Remember, not to long ago the post office tried to make people pay postage on email. What about a MB tax?
WRONG WRONG WRONG.
That graphic is wrong.
It’s called free market, the reason why cable is able to nickel and dime us is because of stupid FCC rules. Obama is a liar. Ok, back to free market, if there is enough competition, then the providers will keep costs low. If a company, like Verizon, spends the money to run fiber to your house, then they have a right to set the costs… They have competition, typically a cable company who has also paid to run cable and/or fiber to your house, they set their costs…. now, let Verizon and your cable company fight for who gets your business… this drives price down.
Do you really want some bureaucrat idiot that won’t even read a bill and that doesn’t understand the Internet making decisions on it?!
WISE UP.
Only a complete tool bending over for corporate elitists would want to allow ISPs to censure their internet. If you want to lose control over your rights as an internet user for the exchange of information, go to China where you belong. Traitors don’t belong in America. If free markets were to lower prices, it would have happened by now. What corporate anarchists want is to overcharge for streaming video, because stupid corporate fossils who hate progress don’t want to lose precious profits from outmoded cable television. Corporate elitists want streaming internet video to fail, because they hate progress.
The carriers are themselves telling us what we can and can’t do on the internet through their actions of throttling or sometimes outright shutting people off. I read about one carrier even blocking a website that criticized the carrier.
And free market? There’s almost none concerning the internet. In many places there’s only one carrier and in others where you do get a choice, the next provider is the lesser of two evils. The prices really have not stabilized but keep going up from what I’ve seen. Speeds are also not as advertised and it seems they do not have to honor the speeds they advertise. So much for free market. Maybe if FIOS would be more widely available, there’d be some real competition, but it’s not so far.
If the carrier blocks the website, use your dollar voice and find another one. Heck sue them if you want. If the speed isnt what was in the contract, call, call, call and demand them to get it up to speed. Trust me, they will do it. Probably your neighbor who is filesharing slowing down your speed.
Easier said than done. They ALL can block or throttle whatever they want if net neutrality isn’t guaranteed. Also going to another carrier doesn’t help those in areas where there’s only one carrier to begin with.
And they all don’t do a damn thing but quote their disclaimer about network speeds. They use that loophole every time.
I’m not sure I like the government intervening either but they are the lesser of two evils as far as I’m concerned. We’re getting bent over by carriers, especially the cable ones.
The Government isn’t the enemy here it is only trying to employ one Rule, Neutral INTERNET Usage. Everyone has the same right to use it freely. The Service providers are the only ones that win and don’t fall for that old arguments about the high cost of Fiber optic infrastructure, because it has been proven that to run a network today costs a fraction of what it did 15 years ago. If they were so strapped than how come their profits are so big, the only ones who are crying are those who might see their stock dividend only double or triple over 5 years and not quadruple. Folks should take a hard look at who stands to benefit in this argument. Millions of INTERNET users or a few ISP’s and a few thousand stockholders who will not make as much money as if they could if they metered the web. Think about it if you had to pay more to send a large photo of your kids to their grandparents cause the file size was bigger than just a text email. If neutrality is the big brother rule of the INTERNET than I will take that over any pay to play option thats has Comcast and Versison making all my rules with fees, taxes, service charges, special rates and nickles and dimes.
Max, you my friend are not very well informed. It is NOT called free market and they will not drive the prices down. What it is called is PERFECT COMPETITION, an elementary economics term. Look it up, it’s what cable, and many cell phone providers do now. Get a clue ending net neutrality would be a disaster.
This is ridicules. This is not about paying 5$ more to access certain sights. This is about network stability. Without QOS, 1 person can take down an entire neighborhoods internet with filesharing, etc.. What about VOIP. Shouldnt John, the 16 year old who downloads tons of music and videos, filesharing traffic be slowed down when Mary, an elderly women, calls 911? You have a cable network were people share bandwidth, of course you want to throttle certain websites. It is only noticable in rare occasions.
Even if telecom did try to make you pay more for each site, some company would simply come along and offer unmetered internet at a lower price and push out the “Evil Telecom” companies. This is all about one thing, the economy. If they pass something that prevents them from managing their network, all these telecom companies will have to “Upgrade” their networks through massive spending. And in reality, Google is really in on this. They want to run voip over 3G so they can make money while AT&T profits fall. With price control for data, and AT&T users dropping their voice and only getting data, say goodbye to advancements in telecom..
Google Voice isn’t VOIP, but a virtual phone number, and you still need your AT&T minutes plan(or other carrier) to get calls to come to your phone.
And traffic management within reason is one thing, throttling or restricting sites that compete against their paid services is another. Or those that they view as detrimental to their reputation. Then what about if they happen to not like the sites you visit for some other reason? This is one possibility if net neutrality isn’t upheld. Do you really want your ISP dictating where you go and what you can do?
That guy’s chart is another. It shows they could severely limit access if they want to, just to rape us for more money. They already do this same crap with cable.