Poll: End of the Web As We Know It

[xDarc]

If you follow internet news at all, you know there are groups out there chomping at the bit to strip the true freedom it offers. In my opinion, the internet is the last frontier, the wild west of the interwebs, an era hurtling towards an end.

There are media companies looking to cut the web up into something resembling a cable tv package, subscribe to this package and get these sites, in the most simplistic explanation. There are many articles on net neutrality that go into this deeper.

You've got the hollywood folks looking to flat out end any kind of file sharing, for obvious reasons. And there's also people in the US government talking about an internet kill switch, a euphemism for control of the web in a time of crisis. I believe joe lieberman had a part in that story.

Point is, you have powerful players looking for more control. They ARE going to get their way for the very reason you bemoan your existence daily in these tough economic times of the new global economy and war without end.

So, what's gonna be the catalyst?

Lately I've been thinking about the wiki leaks fiasco, how one man on the web single handedly undermined the entire US war effort. Granted, Afghanistan is largely hopeless, but when the US draws down with no clear victory; will the next administration point their finger at wiki leaks? At the internet itself?

Ah well. If this incident will not be a catalyst for the coming web crack down, mark my words, something else will. I'm surprised its been this free as long as it has.

update 8/4
http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20012253-245.html

Someone from wikileaks was detained by the FBI... I'm telling you that governments won't stand for people like the guy in the article; but people like this guy are a dime a dozen... the solution is to pull their soap box out from under them... read: the internet.

They'll find a way.

 

[SnootyEnglishman]

Ah conspiracy theories how i love to hear ramblings of a paranoid mind who has no proof behind his ideas.

 

[xDarc]

You cannot control something as big and powerful as the internet, and to attempt to is to fail. These people seem to believe that the internet is a calm, peaceful lake, waiting for them to come buy and just claim ownership.

In reality, it is more of a swarming, churning violent ocean of hatred and memes.

The ineternet seems like a big place, but it is not as big as the world, and look at the influence a few major powers exert over it.

 

[Limzz]

So none of you have heard of the ACTA? Not to sound like a tool but lurk moar?

 

[Dags90]

Ah conspiracy theories how i love to hear ramblings of a paranoid mind who has no proof behind his ideas.

While he's a bit chicken little in his explanation, his points aren't without merit. ISP can and do block sites. Frankly, as the internet becomes more ubiquitous and people who regularly use it become more politically powerful, I don't see it becoming manipulated by corporate interests. Posing this as an "inevitability" is a bit grasping.

 

[Pimppeter2]

Wikileaks undermined the entire US war effort.

Lolwut?

Looks like you've been a victim of the media's fearmongering.

 

[Dags90]

Politics don't enter into the equation. Your vote at the ballot box may stop a political party from trying to limit access, but unless you own major shares in ComCast or Telekom, there is literally jack shit you can do about anything that they may be planning.

I'm sorry, but to suggest that these companies are outside of control by law or legislation is ridiculous. Would it take time? Probably, but there's really very little you can't do via a change in the law. Unless you're suggesting these companies are going to stage a coup or hold the nation at hostage.

 

[Chewster]

No, it isn't inevitable, because as much as certain groups might try and become gatekeepers, the infrastructure of the Internet coupled with people's general attitudes and the history of computer programming will not allow for it. If this Internet gets cracked down on, people will find a new way to circumvent these controls, even if it means creating a new system.

Think about how many P2P programs that have been shut down only to have another spring up in its place. And look at how torrents have now taken over that void and avoided many of the P2P problems through clever programming. There is no legal unity for this stuff, so I doubt there will be anything more than more empty threats. Hell, all this piracy (alongside bandwidth improvements) has lead to media companies finally releasing material online since they then know they can at least control it somewhat if it is on their own site.

You've got the hollywood folks looking to flat out end any kind of file sharing, for obvious reasons.

Where has that gotten them, exactly? Because torrents have been around for nine years and show no sign of stopping anytime soon.

Last I checked, your access to the internet usually depended upon large corporations, with oligopolies in every country/region. So once they decide that they stand to make more by artificially limiting your access than by granting you the unrestricted kind, who are you to stop them?

Not using their service because they have created some sort of tiered pay-per-site system and going with the freer competitor will stop them pretty quick, I reckon.

People's attitudes towards the Internet and how it is to used are too ingrained for this to even be possible. It would take them years of trying to change people's attitudes to make this viable.

 

[Dags90]

You should really replace the "can" with "would", because the answer to your scenarios is a clear yes. The government has the ability to regulate those businesses. Regulation of corporate business is completely allowed in the U.S. ISPs operate on the same regional oligarchies that most electric and gas companies do in the U.S. Yet you're not suggesting that these companies will do the same? Or that the people would be unable to legally battle these large businesses? If this is something that's bound to happen from this business model, why haven't the gas and the electric companies done such?

Let's say they get together with AT&T and Comcast, form a cartel of sorts, price the smaller providers out of the market and decide that from here on, you'll have to pay more.

Who's gonna stop them, you?

In the U.S., that would be highly illegal.

 

[Irony's Acolyte]

Even if the main part of the internet was to come under one organizations control, people would just start up new "underground" networks for people like you and me to enjoy. Hell I don't even know if its possible to control the "main" internet.

 

[Chewster]

Not using their service because they have created some sort of tiered pay-per-site system and going with the freer competitor will stop them pretty quick, I reckon.

Hence, my talk of mono-/oligopolies in the sector. In Germany, Deutsche Telekom is currently murdering the smaller competition. In many areas, only the big companies can provide any kind of service. Now, I know that in America, Time Warner, which obviously also dabbles in movies and music, is one of the top ISPs. Let's say they get together with AT&T and Comcast, form a cartel of sorts, price the smaller providers out of the market and decide that from here on, you'll have to pay more.

Who's gonna stop them, you?

My and many other people's lack of business certainly will. There are innumerable small ISPs around, that can provide the same products and services with negligible differences in the quality.

Why you, as a consumer, would allow yourself to be pushed around by a corporation like that is beyond me. Why not just throw yourself at their mercy now and get it over with.

 

[Nagi21]

Politics don't enter into the equation. Your vote at the ballot box may stop a political party from trying to limit access, but unless you own major shares in ComCast or Telekom, there is literally jack shit you can do about anything that they may be planning.

I'm sorry, but to suggest that these companies are outside of control by law or legislation is ridiculous. Would it take time? Probably, but there's really very little you can't do via a change in the law. Unless you're suggesting these companies are going to stage a coup or hold the nation at hostage.

What law? The internet is a global smorgasbord of people, countries, and other. Now I'm not completely sure but I don't believe there is a 'geneva convention'-ish document defining what you can and can't do to the internet where and when. If there is ignore the rest of this paragraph. A corporation that can control the internet is not bound by the laws in a certain country if it's based globally or in another country entirely for one simple fact: it controls the internet. Best case scenario: Said country decides to prevent corporation from operation in their country. Internet service is discontinued and one country is cut off from the internet. While I'm skeptical about that happening quite like that in the near future, we've had precursors to such an event (Google saying "%#&$ you China"). The same idea goes for the government passing laws to control its internet (I believe China has several locks on it's internet ISPs). It is possible that such an event can happen and corporations have little to say in such an event (as the pieces stand now... see below).

However all this negativity is quite depressing so I'm quite enamored to say all is not lost. Just as with P2P programs and all other internet software, the actual internet itself is ruled by internet law *insert random number here*: We WILL get it. Just as in countries with a hold on the internet now (like that big country in the east that starts with a "C"... the one that rhymes with "Shina"), people are circumventing barricades and blockades and enough stopping power to take down Robert Downy Jr. overdosing on PCP and Diet Coke (no I don't know where I was going with that) and getting to what they want on the internet. Indeed as the internet is essentially a massive group of people who communicate via a means, it can never truly be conquered or stopped as people will eventually find a means to circumvent that control. The fact that government and corporations aren't exactly on the same sides makes it even easier. Now if you'll excuse me there are some home modifications I need to make before that large eastern country sends their lackeys to kill me for raging against their control.

Oh yes one more thing I forgot to mention. If either government or corporations decide to start blocking the internet, might I suggest starting with this Starcraft II ad video that I've been seeing for a grand total of 2,128.32 times in the last hour and a half...

 

[Dags90]

What law? The internet is a global smorgasbord of people, countries, and other. Now I'm not completely sure but I don't believe there is a 'geneva convention'-ish document defining what you can and can't do to the internet where and when. If there is ignore the rest of this paragraph. A corporation that can control the internet is not bound by the laws in a certain country if it's based globally or in another country entirely for one simple fact: it controls the internet. Best case scenario: Said country decides to prevent corporation from operation in their country. Internet service is discontinued and one country is cut off from the internet. While I'm skeptical about that happening quite like that in the near future, we've had precursors to such an event (Google saying "%#&$ you China"). The same idea goes for the government passing laws to control its internet (I believe China has several locks on it's internet ISPs). It is possible that such an event can happen and corporations have little to say in such an event (as the pieces stand now... see below).

The OP specifically talks about ISPs and net neutrality. ISPs are regulated and subject to the laws of the jurisdiction in which they operate. As it is, Google was banned by the Chinese government for years. They're actually a shining example of the government being able to regulate the internet. Most governments in countries with broadband have histories of private companies being bought by the government, in the interest of the public.

 

[Chewster]

Not using their service because they have created some sort of tiered pay-per-site system and going with the freer competitor will stop them pretty quick, I reckon.

Hence, my talk of mono-/oligopolies in the sector. In Germany, Deutsche Telekom is currently murdering the smaller competition. In many areas, only the big companies can provide any kind of service. Now, I know that in America, Time Warner, which obviously also dabbles in movies and music, is one of the top ISPs. Let's say they get together with AT&T and Comcast, form a cartel of sorts, price the smaller providers out of the market and decide that from here on, you'll have to pay more.

Who's gonna stop them, you?

My and many other people's lack of business certainly will. There are innumerable small ISPs around, that can provide the same products with negligible differences in the quality.

Why you, as a consumer, would allow yourself to be pushed around by a corporation like that is beyond me. Why not just throw yourself at their mercy now and get it over with.

Well, let me put it like this.

The best-selling vehicle in America, for the past decade, has been something that Jeremy Clarkson calls "the worst thing that I've ever driven"; and yet, every year, more than half a million Americans spend money for it.

I'm not talking about me personally, but just like most Americans buy shit cars from huge American companies just because, I really don't see Joe Sixpack switching from Comcast to 1337 Inc any time soon, no matter how shit Comcast's product may be. Oh yeah, and Comcast can bombard the Sixpack family with shiny TV ads all day. 1337 Inc? I doubt they have the money for that. People are sheep - they will buy whatever the shiniest advert on the television commands them to.

You shouldn't forget that you should never hold the general public to the standards of Escapists. By and large, we are FAR more tech savvy, computer literate, and generally critical than most people out there are.

You're not listening. People have already decided that this is how the Internet is to be used, and since we pay, we control it. Look at every attempt to stop piracy and explain to me why it has not worked yet if you're so certain this is an inevitability, since despite all the efforts of the RIAA and the MPAA and whoever else, nothing much has changed in ten or so years. In fact, as I said above, media companies have changed their way of doing things to better emulate how the Internet operates (by allowing people to watch media online for free and the like).

This is a long-standing attitude when it comes to computers and software. The OS movement that started in the 60s and 70s has established the attitude that information should be free to a degree, and these attitudes show no sign of changing. Heck, the OS movement played a large role in the shaping of the Internet to begin with. Couple these attitudes with the differing copyright laws in various countries and you have yourself a system that shows no sign of changing anytime soon.