[dewayne at warpspeed.com: [Dewayne-Net] THE END OF THE INTERNET?]

[Bob Jonkman]

I was listening to an ITC podcast with Ed Amoroso, security wonk at AT&T, who tried his best to make content filtering 
by the carriers sound like a good thing.

http://www.itconversations.com/shows/detail965.html

I found myself shaking my head in wonderment an awful lot as I was listening to this...

--Bob.


This is what Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> said
about "[dewayne at warpspeed.com: [Dewayne-Ne" on 2 Feb 2006 at 15:28

> ----- Forwarded message from Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne at warpspeed.com> -----
> 
> From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne at warpspeed.com>
> Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 06:10:13 -0800
> To: Dewayne-Net Technology List <dewayne-net at warpspeed.com>
> Subject: [Dewayne-Net] THE END OF THE INTERNET?
> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.746.2)
> Reply-To: dewayne at warpspeed.com
> 
> [Note:  Worth reading.  Also, check out some of the white papers the
> article points to.  One of note: "Network Neutrality:  A Broadband
> Wild West?".  DLH]
> 
> THE END OF THE INTERNET?
> [SOURCE: The Nation, AUTHOR: Jeff Chester]
> 
> [Commentary] Verizon, Comcast, Bell South and other communications
> giants are developing strategies that would track and store
> information on our every move in cyberspace in a vast data-collection
> and marketing system, the scope of which could rival the National
> Security Agency. According to white papers now being circulated in
> the cable, telephone and telecommunications industries, those with
> the deepest pockets--corporations, special-interest groups and major
> advertisers -- would get preferred treatment. Content from these
> providers would have first priority on our computer and television
> screens, while information seen as undesirable, such as peer-to-peer
> communications, could be relegated to a slow lane or simply shut out.
> Under the plans they are considering, all of us--from content
> providers to individual users -- would pay more to surf online,
> stream videos or even send e-mail. Industry planners are mulling new
> subscription plans that would further limit the online experience,
> establishing "platinum," "gold" and "silver" levels of Internet
> access that would set limits on the number of downloads, media
> streams or even e-mail messages that could be sent or received. To
> make this pay-to-play vision a reality, phone and cable lobbyists are
> now engaged in a political campaign to further weaken the nation's
> communications policy laws. They want the federal government to
> permit them to operate Internet and other digital communications
> services as private networks, free of policy safeguards or
> governmental oversight. Indeed, both the Congress and the Federal
> Communications Commission are considering proposals that will have
> far-reaching impact on the Internet's future. Ten years after passage
> of the ill-advised Telecommunications Act of 1996, telephone and
> cable companies are using the same political snake oil to convince
> compromised or clueless lawmakers to subvert the Internet into a
> turbo-charged digital retail machine.
> 
> <http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060213/chester>
> 
> Links to White Papers mentioned above: <http://
> www.democraticmedia.org/issues/netneutrality.html>
> 
> 
> Weblog at: <http://weblog.warpspeed.com>
> 
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> --
> Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
> ______________________________________________________________
> ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820            http://www.ativel.com
> 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE