Slashdot Mirror
Verizon's Plan To Turn the Web Into Pay-Per-View
snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Bill Snyder writes of Verizon's diabolical plan to to charge websites for carrying their packets — a strategy that, if it wins out, will be the end of the Internet as we know it. 'Think of all the things that tick you off about cable TV. Along with brainless programming and crummy customer service, the very worst aspect of it is forced bundling. ... Now, imagine that the Internet worked that way. You'd hate it, of course. But that's the direction that Verizon, with the support of many wired and wireless carriers, would like to push the Web. That's not hypothetical. The country's No. 1 carrier is fighting in court to end the Federal Communications Commission's policy of Net neutrality, a move that would open the gates to a whole new — and wholly bad — economic model on the Web.'"
They're a carrier. To expect Verizon or AT&T etc to behave like a wonderful, equitable business partner is to expect the earth to move from orbit on the propulsion of sparrow flatulence.
Charging for stuff is what they do, and they will relentlessly continue to try. And each time, like every other time, we'll crush them.
Do your part: tell those crazy telecom guys: monopolies were granted, not earned. We'll take away your easements, your rights of way, your utility company plates, and your seat at the table-- again. Your bribes to Congress and the legislature, and your armies of highly paid lawyers will lose once more, but you big bad boys-- you'll go back to your shareholders and exclaim one more time: we tried!!
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
If Verizon is the only carrier with reliable data coverage in one's area, how can one vote with his wallet?
You can create an ISP cooperative and bring fiber to your neighborhood.
Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
You know what else we used to live without? Refrigeration and indoor plumbing. Neither one of which helps keep me employed.
As people have noted, educate your community about other internet options.
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/05/community-fiber/
Understand your State, your local laws and then read up about what other people did in choice limited regions.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Can website owners charge Verizon for coming to the site? It'd be fun to see how they handle a bill for usage. Oh, and add in admin fees, billing fee, premium use fee, primetime use fee, off peak use fee, per byte use fee, admin fee for counting byte usage, server usage charges, server maintenance charges, gov't tax fee, cross border off-set fee, environmental off-set fees, off/on season fees, grounds fees, snack fees, and general labor fees.
I can't fathom what you mean by content providers wasting bandwidth.
I pay for a pipe, I expect to be able to send and receive packets to whomever I want. It's up to me as the user to decide if I'm wasting bandwidth. If I don't want to pay as much and save money then I should consider how to use less bandwidth.
The problem is that ISPs have been getting away with overprovisioning, underdelivering on bandwidth promises and pocketing the massive profits. If you can't make money with people using the bandwidth you sold them then perhaps you should price your product accordingly. If you're selling burst speeds and not explaining to customers your limits then it's your own fault.
If you run an ISP and still don't understand that you're not the interesting part of the internet, then you have never understood your place on the 'net. ISPs exist for one reason, and one reason only: to allow people to access content. Period. The "Economic Balance" isn't "tipping towards content companies"...the content companies *are* *the* *things* *your* *customers* *want*. The only thing they want from you is to get to those companies (or each other). You are a conduit, a tube, even. Nothing more.
If your users want the traffic, then the content providers aren't "wasting" it...your customers (who are already paying you for those bits, I should point out) are using what they've paid for. Saying that content providers are wasting bandwidth is basically complaining that your users are actually *using* what you sold them...which is really not a winning argument.
This would be funny if weren't so likely to be taken seriously by the regulatory agencies which SHOULD currently be waterboarding Verizon's CEO for even suggesting this. With boiling hot oil.
Look, I pay for a class of service (5Mbit down, 640Kbit up.) Deliver that level of service. Period.
As long as I'm happy with the responsiveness of my system with that level of service, it's none of your god damned business what applications or websites I'm using or visiting to chew up what I've paid for.
Your "throttling" attempts and "bandwidth caps" are nothing more than trying to steal back what I've already paid for.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
Your logic is ridiculous. The part where you claim it's not a sacrifice just because we used to not have it.
We lived without toothbrushes once. We lived without cars once. We lived without deodorant once. We lived without houses once. When nobody had those things it wasn't a sacrifice. When you live in a world that expects you to have those things, it is.
Now, one could argue that it's a *worthy* sacrifice, but that's a completely different concept.
I pay my ISP to view the internet. I give them my money to access exactly the sites they are complaining about. If they did not give me access to those sites I would not pay them. I think most customers feel the same way. Nobody pays $100 a month for broadband access so they can send an occasional email or look at wikipedia once in a while. Verizon should be thanking sites like Netflix for creating the demand that allows to get paid by lots and lots of people like me.
Of course, if Verizon wants to pay me for adding demand to their system (thus allowing them to charge the content providers) then I suppose I might think differently. They can't collect on both ends of the transaction while adding absolutely no value in the middle. Verizon - when do I get my check for watching Netflix?
It seems more like a store trying to charge Pepsi or Coca Cola to sell their products.
Or it seems like we'll only be able to see the information from the people who can afford to pay for us to see it.