Printable View
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...-a8110236.html
Should we be concerned about this?
Sounds like we should.
I saw another news story elsewhere, about "Russia" posturing by loitering warships near under sea communication cables, and that , supposedly, they might be demonstrating how easily 'the internet' could be threatened if the physical links were somehow severed.
We've come to rely heavily on something that is not robust, and not easily protected.
Gosh and we think the yanks are bad, I find
It so strange how we give left leaning countries/ governments, so much slack ,we rage about western occupations but very little is said of how countries like Russia annex areas /parts of the world for there self intrest and disregard human rights, diversity etc.
One eyed politics I guess.
Loads and loads and loads is written and said about Russia's behaviour. More about them than any other country, in fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by life on mars
Disabling electricity sources is a quick way to bring a country to its knees. Hence the development of graphite bombs etc. Without electricity, life as we know it will come to a complete stop.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vimto
Indeed.
The article linked is about how our internet use may become influenced , prescribed and maybe even costed.
I muddied the waters with the second comment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by life on mars
Hmmm not sure about that. As Vimto says Russia is discussed quite often and it looks like quite a seedy, gangster like state run by a complete narcissist with a personality disorder. It appears to be breeding an aggressive ideology of a perceived chip
on their shoulder, which to a certain degree I can understand given WW2 and the NATO expansion to their border.
Are they given that there is a lot of wealth in the hands of a small number of businessman a left country as you say?
^^
Some truth in that, but these are the low latency, high capacity links. Secondary routes would soon become saturated. There are only so many transatlantic cables.
It is a risk. Not sure whether it is a specific risk from 'Russia' solely mind, if at all.
But , the thread was not supposed to be about that, it was supposed to be about this! :
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...-a8110236.html
I'm not sure if you will get to set it, money talks. Same like the adverts on the TV, you have no say in the matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninianclark
You can kinda do that on most routers now, if you log on to the router go to the advanced settings.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninianclark
Or to fully manage usage (on the fly too) more techy folks could make a domestic 'traffic shaper' our of an old/spare PC and run 'pfsense' or similar on it.
Having that built into the router - and broadcasting, an easy to use interface to your phone or tablet would indeed be a great feature.
( 'till the kids get fed up of being managed, crack it and shut you out ;) )
Perhaps some providers offer such a solution even? - I don't know.
But having our global 'net use managed 'upstream' - that has all sorts of ramifications.
Might this get pushed through while we are distracted by other things?
We'd better stay diligent I think.
Yep, upstream is the key, and not connected to what you can do over and above in your own homeQuote:
Originally Posted by Vimto
If 'they' get the opportunity to manage / restrict / charge us for our browsing habits and the services we have got hooked on using ... yikes...Quote:
Originally Posted by Wales-Bales
The internet should be a level playing field IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vimto
we have had " Bandwidth throttling " for years though, all the Big ISP throttle data from certain download places between the peak times, you look at your DL speeds in the evening compared to at night
So what if Netflix pays to have its traffic a priority, you pays your money and all that
I was once kicked off band ISP ( pipex ) as i was using too much bandwidth and they just did not want me as a customer, so they wrote to me and asked me to " stop using the net so much " and when i didnt, they kicked me, guess what, i found a ISP who wanted me and my traffic
Where do Netflix get their money from? The consumer will end up paying more to use the net, a lot more. That's what's 'so what' about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by blue matt
Indeed, is not just about bandwidth throttling, or capping - far from it - though that may be a part of the scenario.
How do you feel about the globalists that have changed that then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wales-Bales
Which ones?Quote:
Originally Posted by cyril evans awaydays
The one's with the power to change the decision originally made to keep the net neutralQuote:
Originally Posted by Wales-Bales
As far as I know they have reversed it back to how it was in 2015, so what has changed?Quote:
Originally Posted by cyril evans awaydays
BTW Obama is a globalist, the current lot are far from it.
Yep, if you want Netflix, you pay the premium, just the way it is now ( except it will cost a little more )Quote:
Originally Posted by lardy
My " surfing " bandwidth will not take priority, but i accept that, maybe if i pay for a premium ISP who have some Priority then my surfing speed will increase, but i will have a choice, pay the premium or not / fast or slow
It is all about money, no surprise on that, that is life i am afraid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wales-Bales
Eh?
The changes that applied from 2015 to now. That is what would be repealed, by 'rolling back' - surely?
Feck me .. :facepalm:Quote:
Originally Posted by blue matt
What were the changes? I haven't noticed any differences from pre-2015 up until now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vimto
?! - I dunno - it was you who said it had been "reversed" to 2015 scenario - ^^ up there somewhere!Quote:
Originally Posted by Wales-Bales
This is not the same as paying more for a better service. The existing big companies can use this to kill competition while it's young - all the innovations that have made the internet what it is, such as Netflix, will have no chance. And you and me will paying more for the pleasure.Quote:
Originally Posted by blue matt
So what?
from a personal point of view in this discussion, the existing big companies just buy the smaller competition who have thought of something innovative, the net will be made up of a few big companies who will control everything ( inc TV ) , we are heading towards it anyway, look at Facebook, they buy anything and everything, though that is not new either, AOL used to do it when i was on Dial up modem, they would see something that was " taking of " and buy it to either add it to what they have or to kill it, of course they had the money, and many of the young start-ups were happy to take the money and drive around in 911's, they were a massive ISP and had idea's of controlling the web back in the early 00's, i remember being sent a link to a PSX cheat cart in HK , it did not exist in the world of AOL , error 404, the page did exist on other ISP's, net censorship in its infancy :frown:Quote:
Originally Posted by lardy
I have seen people on the net argue ( and from the link above ) that it will cost us more, we will have to pay for fast connections for facetime etc etc
maybe it will benefit some as they will price it in chunks
look at that link
Here’s what some people believe internet packages in the US could look like in the future, if net neutrality is ended.
Portuguese telecoms provider MEO has split its mobile plans in such a manner that customers need to pay for up to five addons, in order to be able to use a selection of popular apps that many people rely on every day without incurring heavy penalty fees.
5 for Messaging
5 for Social media
5 for Music
5 for Video streams
5 for Browsing
So for a family who use it all, they pay, for the old couple who only use it to e.mail the family, they pay 5 euro's, the elderly couple next door to them pay a extra 5 to facetime the son in Australia