ISP's confirm '2012: The Year The Internet Ends'

[Anonymous]

My nice little disclaimer, as I think it is needed...  
I don't know what the hell is up with these idiots, maybe they think they need some chick to promote their stuff to get more attention from the brain dead zombies, but it's retarded.  They have "click-here to see me naked" promo to subscribe and this other retarded shite.
Anyways, that just pissed me off how it was all about marketing breasts and sex and all that shite.  The need to do this to attract attention shows the level of degeneracy that many have degraded to.

- - - - - -

http://ipower.ning.com/netneutrality2

[youtube:25jrxqkq]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t89WwcsOj9U[/youtube]25jrxqkq]

Update: Bell Canada and TELUS (formerly owned by Verizon) employees officially confirm that by 2012 ISP's all over the globe will reduce Internet access to a TV-like subscription model, only offering access to a small standard amount of commercial sites and require extra fees for every other site you visit. These 'other' sites would then lose all their exposure and eventually shut down, resulting in what could be seen as the end of the Internet.

Dylan Pattyn *, who is currently writing an article for Time Magazine on the issue, has official confirmation from sources within Bell Canada and is interviewing a marketing representative from TELUS who confirms the story and states that TELUS has already started blocking all websites that aren't in the subscription package for mobile Internet access. They could not confirm whether it would happen in 2012 because both stated it may actually happen sooner (as early as 2010). Interviews with these sources, more confirmation from other sources and more in-depth information on the issue is set to be published in Time Magazine soon.
What can we do?

The reason why we're releasing this information is because we believe we can stop it. More awareness means more mainstream media shedding light on it, more political interest and more pressure on the ISP's to keep the Internet an open free space. We started this social network as a platform for Internet activism where we can join forces, share ideas and organize any form of protest that may have an impact. If we want to make a difference in this, we have to join together and stand united as one powerful voice against it.

Don't let the Internet evolve to this:

[sullivan]

I have serious doubts about the veracity of this.  If ISPs really wanted to do this, they could implement it RIGHT NOW with existing and well-proven technology.  

Limiting the internet to a few 'chosen' sites would utterly decimate Google's business model and would also take the likes of Yahoo completely out of the loop. Hosting providers the world over would go out of business. ISPs would see a significant and quite possibly fatal impact on their revenue streams.  

Software manufacturers who rely on the internet for sale of software and/or distribution of software updates would have that channel completely taken away.

The reality is that Internet users have learned what the internet is all about, and are not going to unlearn it willingly.  

Finally, I would also be suspicious of anything that is mooted to happen in 2012 - it just looks like it is tagging on to the the 'end of the Mayan calendar' craze.

[Anonymous]

Remove the 2012 attached notions... and then think of the internet2 bill that some people in the House or Senate (can't recall where) tried to pass through, and the opposition from public figures to this bill.  Do you still think this is not something "they" (politicans/ISPs, etc) don't want to do?  If they didn't want to do it, why would they be trying to do it?  Why do you not think the agenda is a valid thing to worry about?  Sorry for any misrepresentation upon you, I am asking questions that I perceive to fit with your above statements of not seeing the legitimacy of this agenda being pushed.

Peace.

P.S. We shall see if the Times article will be true if it comes out or not, but for me the internet2 agenda is for real, regardless of any potential financial losses companies would incur.

[sullivan]

Remove the 2012 attached notions... and then think of the internet2 bill that some people in the House or Senate (can't recall where) tried to pass through, and the opposition from public figures to this bill.  Do you still think this is not something "they" (politicans/ISPs, etc) don't want to do?  If they didn't want to do it, why would they be trying to do it?  Why do you not think the agenda is a valid thing to worry about?  Sorry for any misrepresentation upon you, I am asking questions that I perceive to fit with your above statements of not seeing the legitimacy of this agenda being pushed.

Peace.

P.S. We shall see if the Times article will be true if it comes out or not, but for me the internet2 agenda is for real, regardless of any potential financial losses companies would incur.

The Internet2 agenda may be for real, but I don't see it coming to fruition. The internet is one genie they are going to find it very, very hard to force back into the bottle.

[high_treason]

Even if they implemented it, there is technology available today that allows you to by pass all that blocking bullshit. I think I mentioned it in a previous post....here in UAE for instance it is like China's internet and they use a Canadian company to do the blocking of websites, torrents and any other p2p program. The way to bypass it? by buying an account which is cheap as mentioned before that allows you access to everything. So that doesn't worry me much I'm sure when it comes to the internet and computers technologically individuals have always proved themselves superior to corporations for some reason.

- Steven Jobs vs IBM (Before Gates)
- P2P/Torrents vs the entertainment industry (even with all their power they still can't shut it down)
- Linux vs Windows/Mac (Linux is by far the best O/S)

These are only a few examples, so sure we should be aware of it and help stop it but even if they do implement it we can still fightback. BTW Moby did an ad about internet2 and net neutrality and has been very vocal about it...

[youtube:10mt1jtf]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOJnKgsWPGw[/youtube]10mt1jtf]

[youtube:10mt1jtf]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSU2jtNVO3w[/youtube]10mt1jtf]

[theshowpodcast.com]

Remove the 2012 attached notions... and then think of the internet2 bill that some people in the House or Senate (can't recall where) tried to pass through, and the opposition from public figures to this bill.  Do you still think this is not something "they" (politicans/ISPs, etc) don't want to do?  If they didn't want to do it, why would they be trying to do it?  Why do you not think the agenda is a valid thing to worry about?  Sorry for any misrepresentation upon you, I am asking questions that I perceive to fit with your above statements of not seeing the legitimacy of this agenda being pushed.

Peace.

P.S. We shall see if the Times article will be true if it comes out or not, but for me the internet2 agenda is for real, regardless of any potential financial losses companies would incur.

The Internet2 agenda may be for real, but I don't see it coming to fruition. The internet is one genie they are going to find it very, very hard to force back into the bottle.

It is already being done on mobile internet.

[sullivan]

It is already being done on mobile internet.

I have mobile Internet and I have no such restrictions, except that once in a while the performance sucks even more than my DSL connection.  Which mobile internet providers are you referring to?