Internet restrictions?

[lantern]

I just came across a link to this article <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://rense.com/general67/freed.htm">rense.com/general67/freed.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> and was wondering if any of you here 1- understand what this article means ( I get the main idea, but a little too much jargon for me) 2- have heard of this anywhere else/ i.e. is this stuff true? <br><br>And what do you think would happen if a free internet was no more? Are there already enough people onto the whole big establishment lies to be able to sustain a counter-movement without the internet as a link? Exchange of ideas has ben paramount for people outside of the consensus reality in order to both reaesearch and validate each other. Will there soon maybe be a need to move beyond just exchaning ideas into a second phase? The death of a free internet would definitely suggest it...<br><br>Interested in your thoughts... <p></p><i></i>

[DrDebugDU]

One thing the corporations don't want for Broadband is to have too much competition or to sign up everybody. That's what that stuff was about. Basically it means that a city can be serviced by one provider alone and that unattractive small towns and villages will not get broadband access because it's too expensive for the corporations.<br><br>Upto now telephones connection was mandatory so even if you life far away they have provide you with telephone access. What they said with this law was that if you want internet than you can have your mandory 14K4 minimum, but a provider can choose not to implement cable or DSL in your area, because it is considered a luxury. Also the market in a city doesn't have to be free, so one cable company can dominate the whole place. <p></p><i></i>

[hmm]

i could some it up with two words irrelevant nonsense.<br>but there is something to some of what they say but its nobrainer obvious if you remove the lengthly semi-legal bs.<br>You get your cable through a corperate entity.It can do anything it wants with this service.<br>Cable WAS designed as a one way system (or mainly one way) the only reason there is two way on cable systems from the providers point of view is because the internet works on challenge-response (both sides in the communication need an acknowledgement the communication arrived intact,hence 2 way).<br>Tha consumers wanted to do more and more with this two way system has led to great problems with providers as the system wasnt designed for this.<br>Cable and Adsl companies are fighting over you,and your money and thats what this is about.<br>There is a good point that google shouldnt be your only source of information but thats about it.<br>If your cable provider censors you,get another,or start your own <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :) --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br>Now if the government really wanted to "take down" the internet it would be much simpler than this, but thats another post... <p></p><i></i>

[lantern]

Ok I understand. Although I use the internet constantly, I am not very aware of how it all works, so this article had me concerned.Thank you both for clarifying...<br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[ZeroHaven]

I think most of that article is speculation based on some very real fact.<br>"the United States Supreme Court ruled that giant cable companies like Comcast and Verizon are not required to share their cables with other Internet service providers (ISPs)"<br>This is true. It means these companies <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>can</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> monopolize their lines if they want to... <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>but doesn't mean they definitely will.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>The reality is the owner of an internet "server" can selectively censor what information passes through it. If the big companies do not allow smaller ISP's to line share, then they effectively are the only source of internet connectivity. Since they own the servers, they can censor all they want. <br>They can also CHARGE as much as they want, making it very hard for poor people to get information.<br><br>In the worst-case scenario it will still be possible to keep everyone connected using the old-fashioned modem... but at those speeds the modern internet really can't survive. <p><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a239/ZeroHaven/tinhat.gif"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--></p><i></i>

[hmm]

<!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.dslreports.com/faq">www.dslreports.com/faq</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.dslreports.com/forums/all">www.dslreports.com/forums/all</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>might be handy if you ever need a term or technology explained or help solving a internet problem.<br>It may be a bit overwhelming at first (they have a forum for everything) but it can be useful and there is "always" a thread to be found where someone has already asked the stupid question for "you" <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START ;) --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <p></p><i></i>