PDA

View Full Version : ISP's confirm '2012: The Year The Internet Ends'



Mazza558
June 8th, 2008, 11:21 PM
http://ipower.ning.com/netneutrality2

For all the doubters out there (including me), here's more fuel for the fire.


Bell Canada and TELUS (formerly owned by Verizon) employees officially confirm that by 2012 ISP's all over the globe will reduce Internet access to a TV-like subscription model, only offering access to a small standard amount of commercial sites and require extra fees for every other site you visit. These 'other' sites would then lose all their exposure and eventually shut down, resulting in what could be seen as the end of the Internet.

lisati
June 8th, 2008, 11:23 PM
:lolflag: Now why am I experiencing some skepticism?

Mazza558
June 8th, 2008, 11:27 PM
:lolflag: Now why am I experiencing some skepticism?

Hey, I'm still skeptical too, but:

a) It makes interesting discussion/reading
b) There's more evidence than before.

smartboyathome
June 8th, 2008, 11:39 PM
Hm... I think that won't happen. Companies will realise this would not work for them when they finally realise that they won't earn as much money as they were.

diablo75
June 8th, 2008, 11:40 PM
I was able to look at the total run time, divide by half, and count down to her cleavage shot on my hand with perfect accuracy...

cardinals_fan
June 8th, 2008, 11:41 PM
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=815518

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=817597

EDIT: Never mind, I see that there's been an update. I still don't think there's much chance of it happening though. Major search engines certainly won't like it - why would you use a search engine if there were only a few websites?

gameryoshi600
June 8th, 2008, 11:42 PM
the internetz will nevar end!

diablo75
June 8th, 2008, 11:44 PM
Hm... I think that won't happen. Companies will realise this would not work for them when they finally realise that they won't earn as much money as they were.

Right, ISPs would benefit at first, but the rest of corporate (fill in the blank) would be getting screwed over because people couldn't just visit their website, which would impede on economic diversity. It'd be like having to deal with all that damn red tape you find in places like India. It takes longer to fill out the paper work to build a power plant than it takes to actually BUILD a power plant.

I'm not very worried. Looks like Obama's gonna make it in to office and he's pretty big about Net Neutrality. Besides, even if things didn't go right, wireless mesh networking would probably use the new censored environment to its advantage because it would look like a more free, democratic, uncensored option, albeit it difficult to fire up.

klange
June 8th, 2008, 11:52 PM
I think we'd eventually just start our own Internet. I mean, all of the required items are available. You just need to establish the Level 3 routing servers, get everyone connected (we can go back to the days of dial up or hijack a wireless band), and viola, new Internet. Establish some DNS servers, get all of the current sites back up that the community owns. And it can all be open source. You know, I'm liking the sound of this "RebelNet"...

Let the ISPs screw themselves over. We shall prevail in the end.

diablo75
June 8th, 2008, 11:57 PM
I think we'd eventually just start our own Internet. I mean, all of the required items are available. You just need to establish the Level 3 routing servers, get everyone connected (we can go back to the days of dial up or hijack a wireless band), and viola, new Internet. Establish some DNS servers, get all of the current sites back up that the community owns. And it can all be open source. You know, I'm liking the sound of this "RebelNet"...

Let the ISPs screw themselves over. We shall prevail in the end.

802.11s all the way, baby!

fissionmailed
June 8th, 2008, 11:58 PM
I highly doubt the internet will end, but if it does, I'm all for starting a new one.

Ozor Mox
June 9th, 2008, 12:02 AM
The internet was designed as an open and neutral technology, and there are far too many people interested in keeping it this way for this to succeed. That's what I think anyway.

klange
June 9th, 2008, 12:07 AM
The internet was designed as an open and neutral technology, and there are far too many people interested in keeping it this way for this to succeed. That's what I think anyway.
Hope for the best, plan for the worst. "Emergency Internet Backup"...
Hmm... RebelNet can use a wireless mesh. That's simple enough. When areas are too far away to connect, lay down a fiber or put in another node. We have the technology! Now if you don't mind, I'm off to install DNS tools on my server, I need to be prepared...

lisati
June 9th, 2008, 12:08 AM
I highly doubt the internet will end, but if it does, I'm all for starting a new one.
Well said! I'd thought of that too but forgot to put it in my previous post. There are plenty of people around with expertise that could help build a new one.

Mr. Picklesworth
June 9th, 2008, 01:14 AM
That graphic at the bottom scares the hell out of me. It looks freakishly realistic. However, it is flawed in also having high prices. In reality, I expect the ISPs would put deceptively cheap pricing to ensure that the sad majority remain ignorant to how serious of a loss it would be.

What would happen to home-grown web servers? I often share work with people by sending them the IP address on my Internet-facing Apache server, and people often host files on their own servers for smaller sites. Big businesses do it for more control. This leaves room for a single web host to monopolize the space and suck people dry, which is currently impossible.

How about those GnuPG key servers? That's a decentralized network, right? Could be a useful basis for decentralized DNS and routing. Slow, but effective. This could even be done on top of the ISP's existing network, (which is sort of what we have now; they don't seem happy with what we do on the Interwebs), with a single source that quietly abstracts the others. I suppose it would have to be a freaking Death Star of a server, but that's what Linux is for :)

Tundro Walker
June 9th, 2008, 01:16 AM
So in other words, we'd end up with the old BBS systems used in the late 80's / early 90's. Dial up a specific ph#, log into the BBS on the other end, and chat with folks on the forum, get files, etc.

Big telco would ideally like the internet segmented much the way wireless phones / communications is segemented. They want you to use one telco's internet only, and charge you "roaming" fees if you look at sites on another network. Companies that have sites to sell goods or whatever could pay the equivilent of an "800#" fee, so customers could check out their site for free regardless of which net the customer is on.

It's not enough to have an infrastructure in place that promotes the free exchange of ideas ... big telco wants to screw that up by bleeding as much money out of it as they can, which essentially means knowingly putting roadblocks in place so they can charge you to remove them. It starts with bandwidth limiters, traffic routing, etc. And, before you know it, they're going to charge you overage fees for being on their network for "too long".

See, it's business 101. It's expensive to spend money to build out a network, which would provide actual reasons for customers to pay more for the service. No, they can just take the network they have and screw with it in tons of ways to make it inconvenient and a hassle unless you pay more. It saves them the money of building it out, and they get more money from you. Bonus!

klange
June 9th, 2008, 01:17 AM
That graphic at the bottom scares the hell out of me. It looks freakishly real.

How about those GNUPG key servers? That's a decentralized network, right? Could be a useful basis for decentralized DNS and routing. Slow, but effective.
Whatever we can pull together would be great. I bet someone would attach the Wikimedia servers to a RebelNet... I'm going to install BIND on my server and set up some internal stuff, maybe mess around with my own TLDs (may even set up my own alternate root as part of the project)

Mr. Picklesworth
June 9th, 2008, 01:29 AM
Hey, I wonder if this is related to the IP address space problem? IPv4 is looking like a mighty clueless decision lately...

Swarms
June 9th, 2008, 01:39 AM
The danish monarchy will support Rebelnet, otherwise I will just have to win the crown and reintroduce absolute monarchy.

rune0077
June 9th, 2008, 02:26 AM
I have already seen the end of the internet. It is here: http://mdesmond.com/end-of-the-internet/

Dr Small
June 9th, 2008, 02:31 AM
I'm not very worried. Looks like Obama's gonna make it in to office and he's pretty big about Net Neutrality.

That's a pretty bold statement. Anyhow, Ron Paul supports Net Neutrality too. You can check out his writing for it:
http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/ron_paul_champions_internet_freedom.htm
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=705

Dr Small

-grubby
June 9th, 2008, 02:33 AM
i Highly Doubt The Internet Will End, But If It Does, I'm All For Starting A New One.

+1

cardinals_fan
June 9th, 2008, 02:33 AM
I have already seen the end of the internet. It is here: http://mdesmond.com/end-of-the-internet/
I love that site...

Dr Small
June 9th, 2008, 02:34 AM
Yeah, but as to starting our own new (**underground**) internet, I'm all for it. It may take a year or so for it to become really organized, but it is very possible.

SunnyRabbiera
June 9th, 2008, 02:44 AM
That's a pretty bold statement. Anyhow, Ron Paul supports Net Neutrality too. You can check out his writing for it:
http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/ron_paul_champions_internet_freedom.htm
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=705

Dr Small

as does John McCain too

Silpheed2K
June 9th, 2008, 02:49 AM
Yeah, but as to starting our own new (**underground**) internet, I'm all for it. It may take a year or so for it to become really organized, but it is very possible.

yeah and lets engineer all those viral and worm vulnerabilities out.

Crank Parity
June 9th, 2008, 02:58 AM
If that happened, I'd just quit the internet entirely and spend more time outdoors.

klange
June 9th, 2008, 02:59 AM
yeah and lets engineer all those viral and worm vulnerabilities out.

The IPv4/6 interface is already there and standardized, and the open source tools to implement a new worldwide network are free of the vulnerabilities. That's a software-level thing that's been fixed up and is constantly repaired. Unless there are structural vulnerabilities in the Internet I need to know about :O

Seriously, though, we can do it. Maybe start things off in individual cells, keep things connected on the current Net... I think the world could pull it off. I've looked into it myself on a smaller, personal level and what the heck, I think I'll set up my own mini-Rebelnet with an alternate DNS root - that's how such a system would start, ditching ICANN's stuff.

Oh, I really hope it never comes to this though... Just best to be prepared. Just like backing up your data - you hope it'll never get erased, but there's always that chance.

ubuntu27
June 9th, 2008, 03:04 AM
Reading all this *** about the end of Internet, ISP's tyranny, etc.

I been wondering, Can we create our own ISO? How can we open a new ISP?

Maybe I should create a new thread for this question.

Methuselah
June 9th, 2008, 03:57 AM
2012 is also supposed to be the year the world end according to some. I guess if the world ends the internet will end too!

Le-Froid
June 9th, 2008, 04:29 AM
2012 is also supposed to be the year the world end according to some. I guess if the world ends the internet will end too!

Know who the genius who thought that up was?
The same guy who thought the Mayans and Aztecs and stuff lived on the moon and mars until Mars blew up and killed everyone.

He also thinks the magic 12 skulls will save the world or something. His "proof" of the skulls and stuff is really the placebo affect or whatever its called :S

Nessa
June 9th, 2008, 05:07 AM
For north america maybe.

Papi-KB7VGW
June 9th, 2008, 06:05 AM
Wow and I thought that the ony thing to worry about in 2012 was the arrival of The Grays!!!!:)

swoll1980
June 9th, 2008, 07:39 AM
regarding the op that's just funny.

ladr0n
June 9th, 2008, 07:43 AM
I think we'd eventually just start our own Internet. I mean, all of the required items are available. You just need to establish the Level 3 routing servers, get everyone connected (we can go back to the days of dial up or hijack a wireless band), and viola, new Internet. Establish some DNS servers, get all of the current sites back up that the community owns. And it can all be open source. You know, I'm liking the sound of this "RebelNet"...

Let the ISPs screw themselves over. We shall prevail in the end.

*Volunteers as many wireless routers as this jar of coins will buy*

wdaniels
June 9th, 2008, 07:51 AM
Yeah, but as to starting our own new (**underground**) internet, I'm all for it. It may take a year or so for it to become really organized, but it is very possible.

+1 Some of us are already prepared (http://www.opennic.unrated.net/) :D

I guess it could happen in America, but I very much doubt it, and I certainly don't see this happening elsewhere.

HunterThomson
June 9th, 2008, 07:59 AM
http://freenetproject.org/

http://gnunet.org/

Besides that I am sure we would find a way to get around any restrictions;)

User3k
June 9th, 2008, 08:43 AM
http://freenetproject.org/

http://gnunet.org/

Besides that I am sure we would find a way to get around any restrictions;)

I have tried FreeNet but it has always been slow. With more people it could be so much better.

HunterThomson
June 9th, 2008, 08:49 AM
I have tried FreeNet but it has always been slow. With more people it could be so much better.

I can't get it to work I started a thread:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=822363

But ya I am sure it is slow. I am just saying that if this all happened the rebelnet is already set up/being built:) GNUnet seems way more secure but they don't have the web page thing setup yet.

User3k
June 9th, 2008, 08:52 AM
I can't get it to work I started a thread:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=822363

But ya I am sure it is slow. I am just saying that if this all happened the rebelnet is already set up/being built:) GNUnet seems way more secure but they don't have the web page thing setup yet.


It is all in the early stages, but we do have a start if all of us get together. I haven't tried FreeNet in Linux yet. I have only tried it a couple of times in Windows just to see what it was like. But I was uncomfortable using it in Windows because I don't trust XP security with something like that.

I will give it a try in Ubuntu in a few days. Might as well plan for the future, lol.

HunterThomson
June 9th, 2008, 09:20 AM
Ya, I think it look really cool. I think the internet is only going to get restricted/more. I don't have any faith in government. Freenet will soon be the only freenet. Although, the way GNUnet describes it's way of doing things makes me think it will surpass freenet when it gets going do to the fact that it is far more secure.

rudihawk
June 9th, 2008, 09:39 AM
Sigh....remember Y2k....yep same thing.

MaximB
June 9th, 2008, 11:57 AM
http://ipower.ning.com/netneutrality2

For all the doubters out there (including me), here's more fuel for the fire.

Now why would they do that ?
We are currently using IPV4 which means xxxx.xxxx.xxxx.xxxx x=no more then 255
it is a big number but considering the fact that more and more users are coming to use the internet this number isn't so big.

The solution ?
IPV6 will come very soon, even those days last experiments are being made so we all can come and use it resulting in MUCH more IP addresses.

So no I don't believe that the Internet will end in 2012 , at least not because of that reason.

elashish
June 9th, 2008, 12:35 PM
There was once a time when you had to pay to be protected by the fire department....

This is why internet service shouldn't be offered by privately owned, profit-interested companies (*cough* corporations *cough*). And that's regardless of whether it actually does die or not.

BigSilly
June 9th, 2008, 01:29 PM
Methinks last week's story did wonders for that sites' traffic, so they thought they'd do it again this week. It's not going to happen, but if it does - meh. I've got a plug, and I'll use it. Switch the bugger off and do something else.

Wobedraggled
June 9th, 2008, 01:49 PM
It's a good thing the world ends at the same time...

diablo75
June 9th, 2008, 03:54 PM
Methinks last week's story did wonders for that sites' traffic, so they thought they'd do it again this week. It's not going to happen, but if it does - meh. I've got a plug, and I'll use it. Switch the bugger off and do something else.

No, I'm pretty sure it was just that girls *****.

fatality_uk
June 9th, 2008, 04:35 PM
no, I'm Pretty Sure It Was Just That Girls *****.

+1

Luke has no name
June 9th, 2008, 04:39 PM
I think we'd eventually just start our own Internet. I mean, all of the required items are available. You just need to establish the Level 3 routing servers, get everyone connected (we can go back to the days of dial up or hijack a wireless band), and viola, new Internet. Establish some DNS servers, get all of the current sites back up that the community owns. And it can all be open source. You know, I'm liking the sound of this "RebelNet"...

Let the ISPs screw themselves over. We shall prevail in the end.

That's exactly what I say! If acedemia does its job, universities would be at the forefront of developing a new network.

drascus
June 9th, 2008, 05:51 PM
hey so does this mean that we can stop listening to people complain about how their wireless card doesn't work. but honestly I think this was coming sooner or later. I mean how long could we expect them to allow the average person to have access to free knowledge. they have to find someway to keep the average person down and divided. I guess we will just have to once again find some way to start are own underground network or something.

BrokeBody
June 9th, 2008, 06:00 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP_3WnJ42kw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWt0XUocViE

:/

It happened to TV, it happened to radio, it happened to cable.
It can happen to the Internet.

BrokeBody
June 9th, 2008, 06:00 PM
Related (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=815518)

FuturePilot
June 9th, 2008, 06:04 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP_3WnJ42kw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWt0XUocViE

:/

It happened to TV, it happened to radio, it happened to cable.
It can happen to the Internet.

Exactly. Anyone remember when TV was free? Now look at it....

AmishFury
June 9th, 2008, 06:14 PM
so all you people talking about starting a "new internet" how do you plan to pull it off? you'd have to lay your own cable and where do you think you'll get that kind of money?

if you look before you talk about leaping you'll realize the leap you talk about is off a 100 foot cliff with nothing but rocks at the bottom and parachutes are a few billion dollars each

Ioky
June 9th, 2008, 06:21 PM
That is like starting a war between a powerful company, and the rest of the world.

I mean, is not like some other country like Japanese or Chinese is not going to start their own thing. maybe something CWW or JWW will come up, because thing is no longer WorldWW

It can be a good thing though, so every one around the world will push their own knowledge to get what they want.

Which might lead to the revolution of the world.

BreakDecks
June 9th, 2008, 06:26 PM
I am almost positive this won't happen.

Offering less and charging more will never be an effective competitive business strategy, especially when it is costing less to offer more.

If the majority of ISP's limit their user's ability to access the internet, competing ISP's will offer cheaper plans with fewer restrictions. Eventually, all the ISP's will be forced to compete and the internet will be just as open as it is now.

ISP's already know this, that's why this won't happen.

Also, comparing the internet to TV and Radio is not that great an analogy.

Can you put something on TV with a low budget? Probably not.
How about on the radio? Maybe, but not likely.
The internet? Cheap as free.

Can you start your own TV station? Not unless you have the resources, and the money, and the content to deliver.
How about your own Radio Station? Sure, but if you don't want to get tracked down and fined by the FCC, you had best get the resources, money, and content.
How about your own website? Theoretically free, but you can host a website for less than $10 a year and have some decent quality. Also, you don't need to have content to stay active. You can buy a domain name and keep it as a 404 error page for as long as you want, so long as you keep paying the bill for the domain, and (maybe) the bill for the webhost.

Too much depends on an unrestricted internet. Not to mention that regulating a global system is next to impossible, unless you are imposing regional censorship.

Luke has no name
June 9th, 2008, 07:04 PM
so all you people talking about starting a "new internet" how do you plan to pull it off? you'd have to lay your own cable and where do you think you'll get that kind of money?

if you look before you talk about leaping you'll realize the leap you talk about is off a 100 foot cliff with nothing but rocks at the bottom and parachutes are a few billion dollars each


As I stated, universities would start it again, as they did before the WWW was around.

Other private companies and wealthy investors who advocate freedom would invest.

It might cost users more, but we will likely never come to a time when freedom to a public network of information is prohibited. Hell, even the U.S. government might grow a pair and do its job, defending citizens against unjust monopolies.

Dr Small
June 9th, 2008, 07:25 PM
so all you people talking about starting a "new internet" how do you plan to pull it off? you'd have to lay your own cable and where do you think you'll get that kind of money?

if you look before you talk about leaping you'll realize the leap you talk about is off a 100 foot cliff with nothing but rocks at the bottom and parachutes are a few billion dollars each
I don't know what you're talking about, but digging a ditch isn't all that hard, when talking about laying cables. If everyone chipped in, in a neighborhood, you could then connect everyone there, to everyone. Then you just connect another cable to another neighborhood. It would eventually make it's own circut, just like it is today.

diablo75
June 9th, 2008, 07:41 PM
I'm pretty sure Google would be one such investor in a new Darknet, if it came down to that.

Here's a thread I started a while back about wireless mesh networking.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=400409

wootah
June 9th, 2008, 07:59 PM
I don't know what you're talking about, but digging a ditch isn't all that hard, when talking about laying cables. If everyone chipped in, in a neighborhood, you could then connect everyone there, to everyone. Then you just connect another cable to another neighborhood. It would eventually make it's own circut, just like it is today.
Some seriously pessimistic, but honest, questions:
Where do you put all of the equipment (routers, racks, servers, etc)?
What/who powers the equipment?
Who pays the bill for tearing up government owned land?
Who buys the fibre or kilometers of cat6 (lol) ?

Obviously most of the questions can be answered by people chipping in to pay for that all, but then who maintains, organizes and manages the area and equipment? Someone could have a bad day or go on a power trip and then disconnect certain users, or all. What about local, regional, provincial and country wide laws? This does mean, in effect, that there will need a certain level of censorship.

Wireless would obviously be the way to go, but what if you are a central hub connecting to another and the power goes out? Obviously everyone will need a UPS or some equivalent. With current widespread technology (and its adoption, mainly 802.11g), one **** user could essentially bring down a hub/main route point if they wanted by flooding.

If this actually did happen, I imagine the standard core technology we would use (perhaps WRT54GLs) would probably skyrocket up as demand for them dramatically increased. Hell, I would even go as far as saying that the main corporations backing 'pay-subscribe' model would even attempt to pass a bill to outlaw use of 802.11 and certain routing technology 'some-how'. Perhaps make non-business wireless-to-wireless bridges illegal or something.

Of course, this is the most pessimistic view point I could think of; but either way, to be realistic, this is one hell of a serious operation!

Luke has no name
June 9th, 2008, 08:10 PM
Some seriously pessimistic, but honest, questions:
Where do you put all of the equipment (routers, racks, servers, etc)?
What/who powers the equipment?
Who pays the bill for tearing up government owned land?
Who buys the fibre or kilometers of cat6 (lol) ?

You mean who buys the FIBER for MILES of cat6 (rofl) ? I can answer that.

Wealthy investors and private corporations who know that to make money, they have to give consumers what they want (free speech and a good network).

klange
June 9th, 2008, 08:24 PM
We already have the routing equipment, there's no "place to put it", just as there is now, except for some top-level arpa servers, the Internet is a simple, self-sufficient network. The only hard links required are between cities, cities themselves are attached to each other through a wireless mesh (or a wired mesh if needed). We have four years to get as many .11n routers as we can pay for.

In the US, only the FCC (read: government agency with no relations to the ISPs) can even influence laws banning the use of wireless frequencies. The FCC has nothing to do with the tiered-service Internet and wouldn't ban radio frequencies to support it. And if all else fails, we'll use TCP-over-Carrier-Pigeon, my favorite unorthodox networking model.

I figure the best way to go about setting up a new worldwide network is to get all the alternate roots attached first (FreeNet, GnuNet, etc.). That provides you with a DNS backbone. From there, you set up your DHCP services and assign IPs to new nodes (IPv6 should be used exclusively for the main mesh, but local leaves can be IPv4 if needed). Once that's set up, everyone just needs to set their DNS records (which the DHCP server does anyway if it has "domain-name-servers" set), and viola, new Internet.

And as I've suggested before, you can try it out on your own, just go get BIND and named and unplug your router from the world. Set up some new records, set your server addresses (based on your local network model, which is how things would work anyway). Now with IPv6, everyone can be registered with a unique node address easily - hell, just you randomly choosing one probably wouldn't create conflicts. The easiest way to ensure that existing sites continue to function is for them to run their own DNS services. As long everyone plays nice and no one steals existing, in-use domains, all attached networks can be pulled for DNS information from one central server (one of the alternate roots from the old-world Internet.) Your DHCP node already has the DNS entries from whatever it's connected to (and up, eventually hitting a direct connection to the lead DNS node, "Level 3" if you will), and so that filters down with each child that connects, establishing IP addresses that work together and filtering DNS information. After a single successful connection of a branch, it can make those address static, and therefore easily use them for its own purposes - and other nodes will still be able to connect to it. NAT on each node would have to be completely open, so that all addresses work properly and your address filter through (and someone from the outside can properly connect to an address assigned to a machine on the inside).


*phew*
Anyway, to recap, massive set of connected networks with fully open NATs and permanent-lease DHCP with IPv6, assigned form a branching network the top of which is a large, already-existent alternate DNS root.

swoll1980
June 9th, 2008, 08:24 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP_3WnJ42kw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWt0XUocViE

:/

It happened to TV, it happened to radio, it happened to cable.
It can happen to the Internet.

It didn't happen to T.V. broadcast tv has not changed. Cable didn't eliminate broadcast T.V. It is a completely different entity if any thing it's not even as good. All the highest rated shows sporting events and all the good stuff is still on broadcast. I don't even have cable it's a waste of money

sanderella
June 9th, 2008, 08:40 PM
More scaremongering. [-X

Mr. Picklesworth
June 9th, 2008, 08:44 PM
It didn't happen to T.V. broadcast tv has not changed. Cable didn't eliminate broadcast T.V. It is a completely different entity if any thing it's not even as good. All the highest rated shows sporting events and all the good stuff is still on broadcast. I don't even have cable it's a waste of money

Same here. Over-the-air TV is alive and kicking in Canada. I'm lucky enough to live in a suburb on a river delta (originally named Delta), so everything is completely flat. TV reception is crystal clear.
Besides, it's a cooler technology than cable. It's wireless!

Dr Small
June 9th, 2008, 08:59 PM
Of course, this is the most pessimistic view point I could think of; but either way, to be realistic, this is one **** of a serious operation!

It has been done once, it can certainly be done again. We know have more knowledge then when it was initially set up, so things should be even smoother. I don't like the idea of Wireless though, as it can drop out at times, has a slower speed rate, less distant rate, and is not even healthy. Not to mention, the FCC could probably jam the signals if they wanted too.

psychotux
June 10th, 2008, 09:23 AM
Yes I can believe this Whole Heartedly....
Why is simple... Look at the requirement of all Free Broadcasting stations to change to all digital broadcasting on Feb 19th 2009...
Is it still Free "YES BUT"....

The gov't gives out 2 coupons to basically cover the Converter Boxes required to use Digital on Analog.
Well when this happened we had an Analog TV.

We went out and bought one converter box to use on Our Old set, and bought us one of those Digital Ready TV's or so called digital ready TV's.

We couldn't get most of the Digital Broadcvasting Stations in 90% of the time, and they said they Broadcasted Digital 24/7.

Everyone we knew who bought either a Digital Ready Set or a Converter Box who didn't already have Cable or Satallete, Have now because without them, They are CRAP....

This way the gov't controlls everything..
Yes they could shut down the TV stations even before but it would be alot harder to explain.

Now they just say you either listen and believe us or we'll just shut your TV Down...
So Yes I can see this happening to the internet as well!!!!
Just a tighter Control on our thoughts...

You say this is America I say this because I live here, I know not everyone here does.
But this is America we are Free, We aren't as Free as WE'd like to believe, We are more controlled then you think....

Just remember my Tag Line...

BEWARE of the one would would DENY you access to information...
For in their Hearts they DREAM THEMSELEVES your MASTER... :mad:

klange
June 10th, 2008, 11:30 AM
More scaremongering. [-X

I don't think it's scaremongering (how the hell is that a word?), but it's definitely a bit conspiratorial, and above all possible.

And regardless, best to be ready for anything. You know the boy scout motto, "Be prepared"? Definitely applies here.

psychotux
June 11th, 2008, 12:47 AM
I don't think it's scaremongering (how the hell is that a word?), but it's definitely a bit conspiratorial, and above all possible.

And regardless, best to be ready for anything. You know the boy scout motto, "Be prepared"? Definitely applies here.

I don't believe it will be that quick.
BUT over a 5-10 year period YES...

My previous Post will explain why.

They'll sneak it in little by little to get it acepted by the Mases, and then do like they did with Digital TV....

Sure you still have Over the air TV, but it's so friggin Crappy, you have to go Sat or Cable.... If you want to even get what little enjoyment you can out of it...

Dr. C
June 11th, 2008, 03:04 AM
This is not scaremongering at all because it is already happening on the wireless web. The ISP that is doing this is Telus here in Canada.

http://www.telusmobility.com/on/wweb/wirelesswebsites.shtml

Why should an ISP decide which sites a customer may visit wireless or wired?

original_jamingrit
June 11th, 2008, 03:34 AM
This is not scaremongering at all because it is already happening on the wireless web. The ISP that is doing this is Telus here in Canada.

http://www.telusmobility.com/on/wweb/wirelesswebsites.shtml

Why should an ISP decide which sites a customer may visit wireless or wired?

That's for a cellphone.

Dr. C
June 11th, 2008, 03:48 AM
That's for a cellphone.

Not just for a cell phone but for any wireless device that uses the cellular network including laptop modems etc. The principle is to provide bundled free access to their partners and then cripple other websites by charging a per page fee of $0.10 for each page downloaded. This is exactly what the video is concerned about. Furthermore as more people use mobile devices this will hurt if not cripple the smaller websites.

By the way I do know of people who use a cellular plan with another provider to get internet access because that is the only way they can get broadband Internet in their homes.

Mateo
June 11th, 2008, 03:52 AM
Hate to burst your bubble, but a couple of employees at a irrelevant ISP giving their opinion is not tantamount to a confirmation.

Mateo
June 11th, 2008, 03:57 AM
And for the last time, the web <> the internet.

Dr. C
June 11th, 2008, 04:03 AM
Hate to burst your bubble, but a couple of employees at a irrelevant ISP giving their opinion is not tantamount to a confirmation.

One does not have to take the word of a "couple of employees". One can visit the ISP's website and get the facts that is why the link to the ISP's site was posted. Telus is not an irrelevant ISP in Canada far from it, it is one of the "big" three. It is also the dominant telco in Western Canada.

Mateo
June 11th, 2008, 04:10 AM
People who actually buy this junk, think about this for a second. If this were to happen it would bankrupt Google and Yahoo. Search engines aren't useful if you can't visit half the sites in the results due to a lack of subscription.

IM would become effectively useless, as ISPs would probably offer only 1 service of their choosing. Many of the services would be gone. Google Talk wouldn't be around due to Google going bankrupt. Ditto for Yahoo Messenger. Ohh and bye-bye Gmail and Yahoo Mail while we're on the subject (and Orkut and Flickr and all of these other services those two search giants own).

Usenet would be dead, dead, dead. ISPs already are already providing it less and less, and without Google around people simply couldn't get it. You couldn't purchase from Giganews and such because those wouldn't be part of the ISP subscription.

Wikipedia's gone. Popular site, but non-profits can't afford the payola needed to get on a subscription.

Linux itself, while not dead, is weakened tremendously (with the internet accounting for a huge part of the OSes' explosion).

And that's just getting started. Do you really believe all that's going to happen (and more). This huge behemouth is going to go back to the primitive days?

Dr. C
June 11th, 2008, 04:22 AM
People who actually buy this junk, think about this for a second. If this were to happen it would bankrupt Google and Yahoo. Search engines aren't useful if you can't visit half the sites in the results due to a lack of subscription.

IM would become effectively useless, as ISPs would probably offer only 1 service of their choosing. Many of the services would be gone. Google Talk wouldn't be around due to Google going bankrupt. Ditto for Yahoo Messenger. Ohh and bye-bye Gmail and Yahoo Mail while we're on the subject (and Orkut and Flickr and all of these other services those two search giants own).

Usenet would be dead, dead, dead. ISPs already are already providing it less and less, and without Google around people simply couldn't get it. You couldn't purchase from Giganews and such because those wouldn't be part of the ISP subscription.

Wikipedia's gone. Popular site, but non-profits can't afford the payola needed to get on a subscription.

Linux itself, while not dead, is weakened tremendously (with the internet accounting for a huge part of the OSes' explosion).

And that's just getting started. Do you really believe all that's going to happen (and more). This huge behemouth is going to go back to the primitive days?

These are all very valid points if it were not for the fact that it is already happening

http://www.telusmobility.com/clientcare/pcs_west/faqs/wireless_web_faqs.shtml

Consider the following from the above site:


What is not included in the "100 selected sites"?

Any site not directly linked to from the SPARK Sampler menu is considered “Go To Site”. “Go To Site” can be accessed from the main menu or “Go to URL” at 10¢/pg.

original_jamingrit
June 11th, 2008, 04:36 AM
BEWARE of the one would would DENY you access to information...
For in their Hearts they DREAM THEMSELEVES your MASTER...
Hey, I recognize that quote. Best video game ever.


Not just for a cell phone but for any wireless device that uses the cellular network...

...http://www.telusmobility.com/clientcare/pcs_west/faqs/wireless_web_faqs.shtml
Consider the following from the above site:
Again, that is for cellphones. Of course it's unfair, cell phones in Canada have been a ball and chain to carry around since the beginning. I don't see why people would use broadband over cellular networks for normal usage like that. I'd rather use dial-up (and I hate dial-up).

In regards to the issue at hand, the only coverage I've seen on this comes from this ipower group. They say that ISPs have "officially" confirmed this, but they aren't actually showing up any documents showing that it's been confirmed.

The issue hasn't changed. Net Neutrality still needs to be preserved. But I'm very mistrustful of this ipower group. I'm almost certain they only aim to get Netizens hot a bothered, and get everyone to jump on this new social network that they're based in. And I can't find anything on this Dylan Pattyn (or Dylan Patyyn) character they've referred to.

I really don't mind the idea of a horde of blood-thirsty bloggers getting ready to try to take the ISPs down... but this is wrong. They're being lied to, and I'm almost sure of it.

Dr. C
June 11th, 2008, 05:04 AM
Hey, I recognize that quote. Best video game ever.



Again, that is for cellphones. Of course it's unfair, cell phones in Canada have been a ball and chain to carry around since the beginning. I don't see why people would use broadband over cellular networks for normal usage like that. I'd rather use dial-up (and I hate dial-up).

In regards to the issue at hand, the only coverage I've seen on this comes from this ipower group. They say that ISPs have "officially" confirmed this, but they aren't actually showing up any documents showing that it's been confirmed.

The issue hasn't changed. Net Neutrality still needs to be preserved. But I'm very mistrustful of this ipower group. I'm almost certain they only aim to get Netizens hot a bothered, and get everyone to jump on this new social network that they're based in. And I can't find anything on this Dylan Pattyn (or Dylan Patyyn) character they've referred to.

I really don't mind the idea of a horde of blood-thirsty bloggers getting ready to try to take the ISPs down... but this is wrong. They're being lied to, and I'm almost sure of it.

The ISP is doing this on cellular networks because that is where they can get away with it for now. One must keep in mind that more and more people use only cellular for their communication needs. They do not subscribe to land line telephone or cable so how are they going to get their Internet? On their cellphone or other mobile device. The danger is that wired may actually become irrelevant in the near future.

There is no need to trust the iPower group at all. Only take a look in the trend toward wireless over wired communications and what the ISPs are doing on wireless. That is why it is really scary.

original_jamingrit
June 11th, 2008, 05:20 AM
..They do not subscribe to land line telephone or cable so how are they going to get their Internet? On their cellphone or other mobile device...I still don't buy it, but then maybe it's just me, because I don't know anyone in this position, and I don't even have a cell phone myself. So I just can't see it.

Dr. C
June 11th, 2008, 05:34 AM
I still don't buy it, but then maybe it's just me, because I don't know anyone in this position, and I don't even have a cell phone myself. So I just can't see it.

Actually I do not have a cell phone either. I used to have one but I gave up the ball and chain and all the associated fees 8 years ago. I do know many people especially in their 20's who only have a cell phone. There are also those that are to far away from town to get cable or DSL so they use a cellular service from another provider to get Internet over cellular for about $100 a month.

User3k
June 11th, 2008, 06:34 AM
The more I read and think about this. I think the best direction for ISP's to go in is what they have already started.

Limiting Bandwidth on their customers. This will be the middle ground solution for them at first. This way they can make more money on those who buy and watch movies legally online, or music. You get to buy them but you have to pay again for an ISP to allow you to use the bandwidth to download them.

They will start with bandwidth packages. Those that use higher bandwidth will be encouraged to pay more for it. Sort of like basic cable, cable with movie package A, movie package B, digital Cable, with even more packages you can pay money for, etc. Time Warner, among others, has started this bandwidth limit test in Texas.

Now when the get the package system up for bandwidth they can focus on other things. Time Warner's Road Runner has, in my area, free accounts to AOL. Where you can buy music and other large downloads, among other things.

After that is running fairly well and they make a profit or see a big profit in that then they will do something else experimental. My guess is that it will be based on internet safety. If families with kids want to buy Road Runner but don't want the "dangers" of the internet. Then Time Warner could set up an inner internet for them with various website packages with approved types of websites. I am not sure how they will pull that off but I am sure they will. Maybe They will even have packages for medical students that have a huge amount of websites to go to for research, as well as other college student. Man if they did that then they could really help stop pirated music and software. This list could be endless. And they will say something about how they care for people and want only the best. Thats what these packages give.

But each package has different costs. And eventually I can see package deals like this all over the internet. I don't think they will force people to do this. But I do believe they will find ways to encourage it for safety, bandwidth issues, etc. They might even start it out with the package having time limits. That way kids, for example, would only be able to use the internet and the package at certain times. Then the parents come home and the kids go to bed. The parents turn of the package and do and go where they want.

The internet won't die. But it may take on a different look then it has today because of the above. Linux will suffer soon if Time Warner does this bandwidth limit all over the country and where ever else they are. This would seriously hurt Linux users. If a person that has Road Runner and downloads a 4gb Fedora 9 os, then that may take up all the bandwidth that user has available to him or her for the month.

I can see them finding ways to do the above without angering other companies to much, at least for the beginning of it all.

But.... I have a strong imagination. Maybe this would just make a good story and it will never happen in the real world.

FFighter
June 11th, 2008, 07:09 AM
Think about the whole framework and eco-system in place (So many applications, websites and software in general running on the internet and depending on each other), this would break it all. I'm pretty sure it won't happen, too many forces against it (we, the actual users of the global network).

madjr
June 11th, 2008, 08:28 AM
http://ipower.ning.com/netneutrality2

For all the doubters out there (including me), here's more fuel for the fire.


Bell Canada and TELUS (formerly owned by Verizon) employees officially confirm that by 2012 ISP's all over the globe will reduce Internet access to a TV-like subscription model, only offering access to a small standard amount of commercial sites and require extra fees for every other site you visit. These 'other' sites would then lose all their exposure and eventually shut down, resulting in what could be seen as the end of the Internet.


IMHO the only thing dying is:"TV-like subscription model"

Thanks to the World Wide Web.

"Cable" is already Obsolete.

i could live "perfectly" without cable, but not without internet :)

:guitar:

ubuntu27
June 11th, 2008, 05:25 PM
I will only quote some infamous saying.

All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing - Edmund Burke

He who does not punish evil, commands it to be done.
- Leonardo da Vinci

When good people in any country cease their vigilance and struggle, then evil men prevail.
- Pearl S. Buck


Let's hope those quotes makes you in a "thinking mode"
Pay attention to the first one.
"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing"

In order for this mess to never happen is that we must be vigilant and aware/ After we are aware that something is not right, then we must fight, vocalize our concerns.


Some of you say that this will never happen since there are going to be a lot of victims.
Tell me. How many of them will stand out against the tyranny, against the selfish-corporations?

Dr. C
June 12th, 2008, 03:15 AM
I will only quote some infamous saying.

All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing - Edmund Burke

He who does not punish evil, commands it to be done.
- Leonardo da Vinci

When good people in any country cease their vigilance and struggle, then evil men prevail.
- Pearl S. Buck


Let's hope those quotes makes you in a "thinking mode"
Pay attention to the first one.
"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing"

In order for this mess to never happen is that we must be vigilant and aware/ After we are aware that something is not right, then we must fight, vocalize our concerns.


Some of you say that this will never happen since there are going to be a lot of victims.
Tell me. How many of them will stand out against the tyranny, against the selfish-corporations?

I could not agree more

Linux_Man
June 12th, 2008, 03:24 AM
If the Internet starts becoming subscription based, then we create a new Internet. If I have a wireless router and start broadcasting a site from a server, another router could amplify the signal, eventually an entire town would have the website, from there a system of routers/towers could carry it to the entire world. Now granted that might not be really possible, but I think something like that is bound to pop up, either that or some rebel hackers get together and hack the ISP's infrastructure. Seriously, if this takes place then you can bet the entire web underground will rise up and take down the ISPs themselves.

91004
June 12th, 2008, 03:27 AM
I have a old 386 SX25 with 16 megs of ram and a 200mb hard drive.... Think we could store the internet on there? :KS

Linux_Man
June 12th, 2008, 03:29 AM
I have a old 386 SX25 with 16 megs of ram and a 200mb hard drive.... Think we could store the internet on there? :KS


Depends on how much compression we can get by 2012... :lolflag:

Unix_Slayer
June 12th, 2008, 04:40 AM
The internet has been around since the 1960's At&t used it back then, and so did the U.S. It won't be going anywhere, anytime soon. Unless man becomes extinct, then it will be the end. Don't believe what you read. It's the old theory.... What do we know? What can we prove?

Frak
June 12th, 2008, 05:26 AM
|| Scenario Briefing - Year: 2012 ||

The various ISPs who control the stream of information on the internet have decided to support an alacarte/subscription style of service.
While most people will be OK with the Basic or Education/Student versions, others have determined to be free, all over again.

|| Scenario Begin - Year: 2014 ||

The renegades have decided to create their own internal network of systems pipelining directly into a shared information system.
There are no servers.
There are no users.
There are only peers.

The peer exchange allows users to bypass the lobbyists persuasion of the US Government to shut down independent servers renegading against the bill that has been sent, even though this may infringe on the first amendment.

|| Scenario End - Year: 2020 ||

The governments have decided to fully allow legal access to the peernet. The old pipeline ISP system has now been reserved for Government use only. Any connection into the Fiber-Optic lines to the Government results in immediate arrest and detainment.

The ISPs have banked already on the peernet with promising forced seeding among other peers with their trackers while you remain to leech less of the time.



While this is really just a little story I whipped up in little time, it really is a plausible outcome of forcing people into pins.

Everybody enters a building with no escape. What do they do?

1. Escape, enter an unknown area and create a community.
2. Stay and serve the infinite sentence and create a community.

The lesson is that people will always find a way around their boundaries. Also, that the ISPs will always profit off of community.

Unix_Slayer
June 12th, 2008, 05:30 AM
|| Scenario Briefing - Year: 2012 ||

The various ISPs who control the stream of information on the internet have decided to support an alacarte/subscription style of service.
While most people will be OK with the Basic or Education/Student versions, others have determined to be free, all over again.

|| Scenario Begin - Year: 2014 ||

The renegades have decided to create their own internal network of systems pipelining directly into a shared information system.
There are no servers.
There are no users.
There are only peers.

The peer exchange allows users to bypass the lobbyists persuasion of the US Government to shut down independent servers renegading against the bill that has been sent, even though this may infringe on the first amendment.

|| Scenario End - Year: 2020 ||

The governments have decided to fully allow legal access to the peernet. The old pipeline ISP system has now been reserved for Government use only. Any connection into the Fiber-Optic lines to the Government results in immediate arrest and detainment.

The ISPs have banked already on the peernet with promising forced seeding among other peers with their trackers while you remain to leech less of the time.



While this is really just a little story I whipped up in little time, it really is a plausible outcome of forcing people into pins.

Everybody enters a building with no escape. What do they do?

1. Escape, enter an unknown area and create a community.
2. Stay and serve the infinite sentence and create a community.

The lesson is that people will always find a way around their boundaries. Also, that the ISPs will always profit off of community.

It could be a way for the Government to regain control of the internet once again. But it would destroy businesses, and the economy.

Frak
June 12th, 2008, 05:33 AM
It could be a way for the Government to regain control of the internet once again. But it would destroy businesses, and the economy.

Anymore, the Government works for the corporations. This is justified by saying "It's helping the economy..."

Playa1313
June 12th, 2008, 05:35 AM
Do I see a Google broadband around the corner??? :guitar:

Frak
June 12th, 2008, 05:38 AM
Do I see a Google broadband around the corner??? :guitar:
I'd use it :guitar:

FuturePilot
June 12th, 2008, 05:45 AM
Do I see a Google broadband around the corner??? :guitar:


I'd use it :guitar:

I'd use it too :guitar:
might even be open source :guitar:

Playa1313
June 12th, 2008, 05:49 AM
I'd use it too :guitar:
might even be open source :guitar:

Well if they did do it, they would probably be the only good ISP, and if I were them, i would charge a lot of money... but that would be awesome if it was open source.. or only for linux users (wow getting over my head)

Frak
June 12th, 2008, 02:01 PM
Well if they did do it, they would probably be the only good ISP, and if I were them, i would charge a lot of money... but that would be awesome if it was open source.. or only for linux users (wow getting over my head)
I would see them place random text ads in between articles on a page or something. That way, they cut your bill in half.

Tristam Green
June 12th, 2008, 03:06 PM
I'll say this like I did in the other forum I saw this posted in:

LOL it's Athene (The self-styled GREATEST PALADIN IN THE WORLD) and his scantily-clad chick reporting.

Hilarity ensued, and the world did weep if anyone takes the two of them the slightest bit seriously.

Eddie Wilson
June 12th, 2008, 03:36 PM
LOL!!! I'm sure I saw this in a B movie one time.

BrokeBody
June 12th, 2008, 03:54 PM
This is getting more serious.

The End of Sex and Porn !!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t89WwcsOj9U)

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

hoboken
June 12th, 2008, 05:18 PM
OK people, this has to be a joint effort. I can't take it all myself, so we have to divide up the work, and save the best bits.

I've got hentai covered, and my roommate's got foot fetish. Who's taking bestiality?

wootah
June 12th, 2008, 06:37 PM
OK people, this has to be a joint effort. I can't take it all myself, so we have to divide up the work, and save the best bits.

I've got hentai covered, and my roommate's got foot fetish. Who's taking bestiality?

:shock: + :-&

hoboken
June 12th, 2008, 06:39 PM
Ah, that's too bad. Perhaps BDSM is more suited to sir's tastes?

wootah
June 12th, 2008, 06:44 PM
Ah, that's too bad. Perhaps BDSM is more suited to sir's tastes?

Golden showers ftw :)

jkjk :lolflag:

Midwest-Linux
June 13th, 2008, 12:41 AM
If they started limiting bandwith on a grand scale here in the United States, expect lawsuits to happen. Restricting domestic and international commerce (when I last looked) is against the law. Especially in areas where there is only one broadband provider, a single broadband provider could be viewed or re-defined as a monopoly.

You have major players from ITunes to growing video download sites like Netflix. Hollywood and the whole entertainment industry would be among those who will force net neutrality as their bottom line will suffer. Making consumers move from digital downloads and back to CD's is not going to happen.


We keep hearing that once the digital transition goes through (here in the U.S.), some of the airwaves will be freed up for wireless and broadband. Companies that put caps on the internet will be only hurting themselves as consumers will have more choices to choose from in the future.

IF the internet came to a end, let say it does. What would we have? Live Mesh, wireless G, N and whatever new technology on the horizon will see the rise of local neighborhood networks and regional intra and internet. You think powers that be have issues with sharing now, they will be in a tizzy if local and even regional wireless networks proliferate due to the demise of the web.

Few people realize that other modes such as ham radio allow for world wide communications without cable or telephone lines. There was internet of sorts on ham radio before there was even a internet as we know it. It was called "packet radio" and it was connected to local nodes such as local BBS through ham radio over the air.

Before there was the internet, there were phone line BBS, fax and pagers and...snail mail. Some have commented that if the internet went down Linux would suffer. I see there is a fair amount of people on E-Bay selling linux distros for a fair price, often just for a few dollars. IF it came to it, Linux would not really suffer (as some commented in previous threads) since spending $4 on a new Linux distro on E-bay or elsewhere would be in the range of everyone.

dynamethod
June 13th, 2008, 12:51 AM
Take that article with a large truck load of salt, because its BS

Too many companys rely on the internet and even more so now, and its dependancy is growing

FuturePilot
June 13th, 2008, 01:06 AM
Some have commented that if the internet went down Linux would suffer. I see there is a fair amount of people on E-Bay selling linux distros for a fair price, often just for a few dollars. IF it came to it, Linux would not really suffer (as some commented in previous threads) since spending $4 on a new Linux distro on E-bay or elsewhere would be in the range of everyone.

Yes, but what about updates? What about getting the source? I doubt a lot of distros could afford to pay some high price to make their updates and website available to users

Mateo
June 13th, 2008, 01:10 AM
Before there was the internet, there were phone line BBS, fax and pagers and...snail mail. Some have commented that if the internet went down Linux would suffer. I see there is a fair amount of people on E-Bay selling linux distros for a fair price, often just for a few dollars. IF it came to it, Linux would not really suffer (as some commented in previous threads) since spending $4 on a new Linux distro on E-bay or elsewhere would be in the range of everyone.

Not true, it's a major hurdle to get people to spend money, even if it is only a few dollars. Maybe we are saying the same thing just with slightly different words but my opinion was not that "linux will die" or even go back to the 90s but rather that it's momentum will be stopped.

Yuki_Nagato
June 13th, 2008, 01:12 AM
I am still trying to figure out how to turn my house into a mini ISP so that I can skip the data mining and subscription fees. Even if the materials to do so require much more money.

spannerman1
June 13th, 2008, 01:17 AM
hi,2012 internet ends?i can feel that ham radio is gonna come back into fashion,lol,and everyone will be broadcasting/receiving zero`s and ones to each other,problem with high frequency is that it needs line of sight with antennas,so we would all have to use less than 35 mhz tx/rx,similar to cb.Maybe the start of the next 11 year solar cycle is gonna knock out more satellites than it did in late 90`s.
One thing tho`,very small transmitting power goes a long way in early years of the cycle,i heard of folks using 1 watt power to "work" a whole continent.For the Doom mongereres,get yerselves a 50 mtr dipole set up,just in case.

Dr Small
June 13th, 2008, 02:28 AM
hi,2012 internet ends?i can feel that ham radio is gonna come back into fashion,lol,and everyone will be broadcasting/receiving zero`s and ones to each other,problem with high frequency is that it needs line of sight with antennas,so we would all have to use less than 35 mhz tx/rx,similar to cb.Maybe the start of the next 11 year solar cycle is gonna knock out more satellites than it did in late 90`s.
One thing tho`,very small transmitting power goes a long way in early years of the cycle,i heard of folks using 1 watt power to "work" a whole continent.For the Doom mongereres,get yerselves a 50 mtr dipole set up,just in case.
Now that is what I want to do...

Midwest-Linux
June 13th, 2008, 03:01 AM
hi,2012 internet ends?i can feel that ham radio is gonna come back into fashion,lol,and everyone will be broadcasting/receiving zero`s and ones to each other,problem with high frequency is that it needs line of sight with antennas,so we would all have to use less than 35 mhz tx/rx,similar to cb.Maybe the start of the next 11 year solar cycle is gonna knock out more satellites than it did in late 90`s.
One thing tho`,very small transmitting power goes a long way in early years of the cycle,i heard of folks using 1 watt power to "work" a whole continent.For the Doom mongereres,get yerselves a 50 mtr dipole set up,just in case.

The internet really slowed the momentum of ham radio. This despite the advent of no code and liberalization of the phone bands in many countries.

Yet it when it comes down to it, when all the power lines and the phone lines and the cell towers are down or stop working. Ham radio is still the only place to get information in and out in emergency situations like the aftermath of a tornado, floods, hurricanes or worse. More advanced hams are usually prepared with generators, solar panels and batteries just for these purposes.

Some predict that 2012 will bring about major changes and mention the Mayan calender as a reason for this. One can only speculate at this point.

spannerman1
June 14th, 2008, 10:02 AM
hiya,ooooh mayan calendar?,mayans worshipping sun,i hope that calender was written by a mayan shaymen,who had overdone it with one of his magic potions,lol.
They didnt know how to detect sunspot activity/11 year cycle, in those days,,,did they??.Maybe i had better hurry,and get a large underground faraday cage built.