Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The End of the Internet?
The Nation ^ | Wed Feb 1, 2006 | Jeff Chester

Posted on 02/02/2006 11:45:42 AM PST by presidio9

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-58 last
To: Cyclone59

LOL! You're getting it a few dollars cheaper than I am.

Dang Iowa Democrats!


41 posted on 02/02/2006 12:53:15 PM PST by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Remember the DiVX vs DVD fiasco? Look how well that turned out for the money-grubbers. And this is more of the same. Stupid, just stupid.


42 posted on 02/02/2006 12:57:06 PM PST by Citizen of the Savage Nation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

After all the flak we're hearing
about "eavesdropping" on international
phone calls and internets?

"permit them to operate Internet and other digital communications services as private networks, free of policy safeguards or governmental oversight...

never gonna happen!


43 posted on 02/02/2006 12:59:33 PM PST by Grendel9 (u ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: adam_az

QoS packet stamping tends to be a muddy area on the Internet. On one hand, it would be very nice if time sensitive traffic like video game packets or streaming video, could get expedited over regular email traffic, but there are problems with the idea. First and foremost, companies are going to be EXTREMELY tempted to use it as a profit model. Now, I don't have a problem with "pay an extra $5 a month for better video and gaming performance", but what happens when they try to DE-emphasize certain kinds of traffic? While we do have the market based solutions I pointed out above, I'd hate to see some kind of ala carte billing take over (pay $30 for your Internet connection, another $10 to enable video streaming, another $5 to enable UDP for online gaming...and so on).


44 posted on 02/02/2006 1:01:18 PM PST by Arthalion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Facts are funny things to the Nation... Enron, Bush and the Houston Astros?

Tuesday, January 22, 2002

What the hell is going on at The Nation? The magazine published, then modified, then finally removed from its site an absurd article by Matt Bivens trying to link George W. Bush to Enron via Bush's failed ventures into baseball. The only problem with the article was that Bivens comes across as perhaps the only person in America dumber than the president.

Originally published on January 17, 2002, the article began,

When George W. Bush co-owned the Houston Astros and construction began on a new stadium, Kenneth Lay agreed to spend $100 million over thirty years for rights to name the park after Enron.

The Wall Street Journal's James Taranto pointed out that Bush was a part owner of the Texas Rangers, not the Houston Astros. Someone at The Nation dutifully modified the lead of Bivens article to read,

When George W. Bush co-owned the Texas Rangers and construction began on a new stadium, Kenneth Lay agreed to spend $100 million over thirty years for rights to name the park after Enron.

The only problem with this, of course, is that it is the Astros, not the Rangers, that play at Enron Field. The Rangers play at the Ballpark in Arlington. Taranto suggests that an accurate lead would have looked like this,

A year after George W. Bush sold his interest in the Texas Rangers, construction began on a new stadium for the Houston Astros, and Kenneth Lay agreed to spend $100 million over thirty years for rights to name the latter team's park after Enron.

Sources:

The Enron Box. The Nation, Mike Bivens, January 17, 2002. (The Nation has removed this article from its web site, but here's a screenshot from their search engine showing the article).

Best of the Web. James Taranto, OpinionJournal.Com, January 21, 2002.


45 posted on 02/02/2006 1:02:50 PM PST by weegee (Happy Holidays! Tis the season of MLK, Chinese New Year, Tet, Valentine's, Presidents...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

And why do you think that? These companies will scrtch anyone rear for a buck.


46 posted on 02/02/2006 1:03:58 PM PST by MiHeat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: thecabal
"Why should they be allowed to use my pipes?"


Screw this turd brain.. Hopefully satellite technology will be cheaper and cheaper as more smaller baby bells get into the action. Competition is a good thing.

This guy can blow it out his pipes.
47 posted on 02/02/2006 1:12:12 PM PST by taxed2death (A few billion here, a few trillion there...we're all friends right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
I don't care. Cause I'm getting rich off Microsoft and AOL.

You see, I got this email and all I did was forward it and.....

48 posted on 02/02/2006 1:14:15 PM PST by N. Theknow (Kennedys - Can't drive, can't fly, can't ski, can't skipper a boat - But they know what's best.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Aren't these very same morons suing Philadelphia for providing free Wi-Max? This author needs to get a couple of clues.


49 posted on 02/02/2006 1:48:17 PM PST by Hardastarboard (HEY - Billy Joe! You ARE an American Idiot!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
I've had verizon DSL for years and every month they automatically {electronically} deduct an agreed upon amount from my checking account. Since I've now found out that it's free, I've sent verizon an email requesting a FOOL refund.
They said the check is in the mail,
that they will respect me in the morning
and they won't............

50 posted on 02/02/2006 2:06:34 PM PST by USS Alaska (Nuke the terrorist savages - In Honor of Standing Wolf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Pay per click only applies to B-2-B use of the private channels. For C-2-C and B-2-C the same rules as today must continue to apply or else there will be a whole lot of receiverships going on. Gotta keep things mostly free or else the internet becomes just another fad.


51 posted on 02/02/2006 2:08:39 PM PST by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
"Free internet?" What planet are these people from? Virtually everyone I know pays a monthly fee for internet access/e-mail, etc.

I don't think the author meant "free" as in no cost. I believe he meant "free" as in unregulated use of the bandwidth you are already paying for. He is suggesting in his article that some of these companies are researching the possibility of restricting bandwidth based on type of traffic - streaming, email, p2p, etc.
52 posted on 02/02/2006 2:13:09 PM PST by fr_freak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

..if there was any hope of content control, censorship or corporate content control, this daft publication, The Nation, would have been shut down long ago.

As it is, I put my trust in the free market.


53 posted on 02/02/2006 2:19:22 PM PST by TC Rider (The United States Constitution © 1791. All Rights Reserved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Xenalyte

"Actually, this is the end of the Internet."

Oh, I dunno about that. Do you have any rear-view pictures online of you in that Laura Croft getup?

8)


54 posted on 02/02/2006 2:24:05 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (Freedom isn't free--no, there's a hefty f'in fee--and if you don't throw in your buck-o-5, who will?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Tolkien

We should be ashamed for not pressing for their deaths. Do you have any links or articles on this?


55 posted on 02/02/2006 4:37:04 PM PST by satchmodog9 (Most people stand on the tracks and never even hear the train coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Tolkien

Dad,
Is that you? ;^)


56 posted on 02/02/2006 4:38:27 PM PST by Samwise (I freep; therefore, I am.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Arthalion
What's AT&T going to do when they announce some new draconian fee structure, and Google announces their new $15 a month flat rate ISP service the following day...with unlimited Vonage-like telephony?

AT&T would get crushed like a 2000 year old cicada skin. I was thinking the same thing as I was reading this. If they tier the backbone, some competitor will come along with a backhaul to an unregulated international backbone link and kick their butts to bankrupcty.

57 posted on 02/02/2006 4:58:26 PM PST by Centurion2000 (SUPPORT THE DANES! BURN A KORAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: markedman
Actually the telcos are being robbed blind. ... someone is picking up the tab.

What? Do you thing Google just went out and bought an $89.99/month DSL connection? The big players buy big pipes and get charged accordingly. AT&T is just complaining because they can't figure out how to make as much money as Google. They are in the same position as an asphalt company trying to get a cut of the tools paid on the PA Turnpike.

Somewhere along the line, I guess they didn't figure out that the business of selling bitrate is just not as profitable as the business of selling useful information, nor that they are really two different business.

Next thing you know, the taxi cabs will charge more to deliver you to Neimann Marcus than they do to deliver you to Target.

The Telco's aren't in the same business as Google, and Wall Street knows it, though the Telco's seem to be a bit confused about it. Selling pipes-n-lights (Telco term for selling access & bitrate) is a commodity business. Google is not in a commodity business.

58 posted on 02/03/2006 6:03:38 AM PST by slowhandluke (It's hard work to be cynical enough in this age)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-58 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson