A very scary article on the future of the internet.

[handy]

The following article really should be read right through by anyone who cares about freedom on the internet as we know it today surviving into the future:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060213/chester

[daverich]

can't see it happenning.

Someone like canonical or somebody would just start their own isp....

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[Handyman Felting]

We are already having our Internet rights taken away from us in Australia, soon the government will be monitoring our activities and blocking sites that are illegal (in other words sites that critisise the government). Our Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is pretty much in love with the Chinese and it seems that in the next few years our country is going to be almost indistinguisable from China in terms of basic human rights (like unfiltered, unmonitored Internet access).

[K.Mandla]

Excellent article, but it's dated almost two years ago.

[handy]

Excellent article, but it's dated almost two years ago.

Apparently the basic plans for this have been around for 12 or more years. From what I heard in a video.

& as a previous poster said, in Oz, there is very strong movement from our Federal government to impose national censorship that will be the toughest in the world, from what I read.

Why?

[sdowney717]

quenching the freedom of the internet and instituting multiple tolls will kill the growth. Less usage means less money from advertising.
Perhaps someone will setup an internet number 2 using wimax wireless and blanket the countryside with free or cheap high speed internet access. This way the pipes are air pipes and less fiber in the ground will be involved.

[handy]

can't see it happenning.

Someone like canonical or somebody would just start their own isp....

Kind regards

Dave Rich

Who controls the internet backbone, controls the internet. ISP's are only access points.

[handy]

quenching the freedom of the internet and instituting multiple tolls will kill the growth. Less usage means less money from advertising.
Perhaps someone will setup an internet number 2 using wimax wireless and blanket the countryside with free or cheap high speed internet access. This way the pipes are air pipes and less fiber in the ground will be involved.

Satellites are required as well as government & other international body approval.

The phone companies want to control the internet for the profit they see in the future, as old ways continue to die & are replaced by the internet's ability to stream & automate.

Governments always want more control of information, corporations always want more of everything.

We currently have an internet where information on all subjects is freely available, China & much of the Middle East does not. If the Oz government has its way we won't have information freedom here in my country soon either.

[mips]

Excellent article, but it's dated almost two years ago.

It's age does not make it any less relevant though ;)

[Comzee]

Who controls the internet backbone, controls the internet. ISP's are only access points.

That's half true. Most IPS's do own huge chucks of infrastructure. The companies that originally laid the fiber optic networks went bankrupt because of the enormous cost it took to create it all. Other companies than bought the infrastructure for a fraction of the cost it took to make it. The vary reason ISP's can charge you X amount of money a month is because they're the ones that have to maintain the infrastructure. Contrary to popular belief it does cost the ISP more money to give more bandwidth, ect . . .

That's how it happened in the united states at least.

[K.Mandla]

Apparently the basic plans for this have been around for 12 or more years. From what I heard in a video.

It's age does not make it any less relevant though ;)
Sorry, I didn't mean it invalidated the article. I just thought it a shame that it wasn't more recent. The issue is still pertinent.

[handy]

That's half true. Most IPS's do own huge chucks of infrastructure. The companies that originally laid the fiber optic networks went bankrupt because of the enormous cost it took to create it all. Other companies than bought the infrastructure for a fraction of the cost it took to make it. The vary reason ISP's can charge you X amount of money a month is because they're the ones that have to maintain the infrastructure. Contrary to popular belief it does cost the ISP more money to give more bandwidth, ect . . .

That's how it happened in the united states at least.

My comment of ISP's being only access points was a very loose generalisation, how about if I call the ISP's clients on the internet backbone? :-)

[Swagman]

From the ashes will rise a new Ionica.

This would work extremely well in cities etc but would be uber cr4p in the Outback !!

[mips]

Sorry, I didn't mean it invalidated the article. I just thought it a shame that it wasn't more recent. The issue is still pertinent.

No worries Murray as the Ozzies would say. I just said what I said in case someone else interpreted it differently :)

[mips]

That's half true. Most IPS's do own huge chucks of infrastructure. The companies that originally laid the fiber optic networks went bankrupt because of the enormous cost it took to create it all. Other companies than bought the infrastructure for a fraction of the cost it took to make it. The vary reason ISP's can charge you X amount of money a month is because they're the ones that have to maintain the infrastructure. Contrary to popular belief it does cost the ISP more money to give more bandwidth, ect . . .

That's how it happened in the united states at least.

I have to disagree with you.

The entire Tier 1 network is owned by ONLY 8 ISP's. The Tier 2 networks hang of them and the Tier 3 guys hang of the Tier 2's.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tier_1_network