so, internet tolls, or no tolls?

Osmer_Toby · Jun 9, 2006

i'm confused- does anyone understand the outcome of this vote
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/internet/06/09/cable.phone.tv.ap/index.html

?

in the not-too-distant future, tolls on the internet, or not?

terri · Jun 9, 2006

No, it's been rather obtuse so far. But then I've not read more than a quick article here and there. It gives me a headache. :lol:

markc · Jun 9, 2006

It looks like the first vote mentioned doesn't have much of an impact on what you are thinking of. This is making it easier for companies to get into the cable TV market. The big issue getting buzz right now is that the owners of the networks may start charging content providers like Google. If they don't pay, they get slower connections or none at all. I think it could have a very scary effect. It's not just about having fast downloads. What if AT&T wanted to keep news quiet about the NSA issue that came up recently? They could drop connections to any news story about it, or even slow or cut connection to any news organization that carried such a story. The second vote involved this, and that ammendment was defeated.

http://www.savetheinternet.com/

voodoocat · Jun 9, 2006

markc said:
It looks like the first vote mentioned doesn't have much of an impact on what you are thinking of. This is making it easier for companies to get into the cable TV market. The big issue getting buzz right now is that the owners of the networks may start charging content providers like Google. If they don't pay, they get slower connections or none at all. I think it could have a very scary effect. It's not just about having fast downloads. What if AT&T wanted to keep news quiet about the NSA issue that came up recently? They could drop connections to any news story about it, or even slow or cut connection to any news organization that carried such a story. The second vote involved this, and that ammendment was defeated.

http://www.savetheinternet.com/

Damn I wish there were lobbyists for the people in washington grrrr.. this is ****ing ridiculous. I don't think anyone wants the big telco's to control what content is actually on the web. But we don't get that debate. Only the people getting their wallets lined with money from at&t get that decision.

terri · Jun 9, 2006

voodoocat said:
Damn I wish there were lobbyists for the people in washington grrrr.. this is ****ing ridiculous. I don't think anyone wants the big telco's to control what content is actually on the web. But we don't get that debate. Only the people getting their wallets lined with money from at&t get that decision.

Write a letter, Voods!! It will make you feel better. :sillysmi: