Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Whose Web is it, anyway?

The subject is the name of an article written in today's NY Daily News by Juan Gonzalez regarding new legislation in Washington to overhaul the Telecommunications Act:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/col/story/389908p-330660c.html

Some rather chilling (and more expensive) scenarios seemingly await us, especially this community which literally lives in cyberspace.

Comments

  • [GameFreak][GameFreak] Member Posts: 9
    uhm if i wanted to read the paper i would go sit down with it ..... where on a site thats mostly discusses game ya know..... so wtf!!??!!image
  • grimweepergrimweeper Member Posts: 2,047



    Originally posted by [GameFreak]
    uhm if i wanted to read the paper i would go sit down with it ..... where on a site thats mostly discusses game ya know..... so wtf!!??!!image



    damn you know becouse i thought this was the OFF-TOPIC (as in not related to games) section.image

    that was a pretty good article,  it must be pretty cool to have free internet but those idiot ISP's have to be so gay and charge us for it, unlike that one neighborhood. the government shold just be like screw you were giving everyone free internet.

    image

    image
  • zenstainzenstain Member Posts: 24



    Originally posted by [GameFreak]
    uhm if i wanted to read the paper i would go sit down with it ..... where on a site thats mostly discusses game ya know..... so wtf!!??!!image


    I would've thought you'd note the obvious connection between Internet access and online gaming.  Guess not.  Did you even bother to read the article?

    zen

  • RufiusRufius Member Posts: 2,031

    This is all up for debate and, it doesn't hold anywater yet, the debate has been going on for a long time and if something like that is issued it'll be a long time from now.

    Professor Hubert Farnsworth - That question is less stupid but, you asked it in a profoundly stupid way.

  • zenstainzenstain Member Posts: 24



    Originally posted by Betrayal-X

    This is all up for debate and, it doesn't hold anywater yet, the debate has been going on for a long time and if something like that is issued it'll be a long time from now.



    Well, there are three differenst legislations in front of both houses of Congress right now that directly impact this, so I imagine it won't be all that long a time before something is in fact shaped and issued, likely to the detriment of yours and my $'s.  Here is a link from the NYC Independent Budget Office to a document highlighting the sponsers of each legislation and what it could mean if they were to pass:

    http://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/newsfax/insidethebudget146.pdf

    Note this passage for the first rewrite under consideration (bold is mine):

    Under the Ensign bill, New York and other localities would also
    lose other forms of local control. Localities would be barred
    from charging video providers fees for construction permits to
    dig in public streets or roadways. Nor could cities require that
    providers offer their telecommunications services in lowincome
    communities or set other consumer protections. The
    bill would also create barriers to localities forming their own
    municipal wireless networks and limit the number of public,
    education, and government channels cable providers would
    have to make available to localities to four.

    I'm a little surprised there's not more opinion here about this as if any of these rewrites of the bill are passed, every segment of the online gaming community (amongst many) would be directly impacted, almost certainly not for the better.  I'm no fan of government-controlled business for the most part, but a deregulated media carrier industry that has total control over where and how a certain level of signal (if any, in some cases) is to be brought in, and at what price for each level, can't be a good thing and you'll almost certainly see a large segment of mostly the poorer population suffer.  And I can't see why any given community that pools it's resources can't provide that same community with the service of online access if that's what their constituency wanted, other than the industry lobbyists furthering their money-grab, which is all this really is.  I'd also love to hear from someone on the mmorpg.com staff around this topic.

    zen

  • RufiusRufius Member Posts: 2,031

    Too early to tell. Bill's bill is old and, they should revise it to the current standards. I guess that's what they're trying to do but, U.S. won't be the only people affect as the U.S. is the sole overseer of the internet.

    Professor Hubert Farnsworth - That question is less stupid but, you asked it in a profoundly stupid way.

  • zenstainzenstain Member Posts: 24

    Imagine paying 25 - 50% more for the level of broadband you're currently accustomed to.  Not that it's any great bargain for me here, i'm at $45/month, but if that bill goes up to $55-$60?  Of course, I can keep paying my $45, but all that'll get me in this scenario is a throttled connection.  Or if you're one of the millions of people out in the heartland, where it's miles and miles of rural America and Canada between the big cities where the carriers will make their real money?  You think they're going to have an interest in maintaining the same kind of broadband connections (other than satellite)?  Or in poor urban areas where they may feel that providing a tier 1 broadband trunk won't ultimately be worth it?  All posibilities, and non-enforceable anymore, if any of it comes to pass.

    zen

     

Sign In or Register to comment.