
Can a broken Net neutrality with a tier system make the internet better? - varmeljus
If we pretend that Net neutrality is repealed and almost all ISPs start having just the major websites ( Netflix, Facebook, google... ) for a basic price and the rest cost extra.<p>Wouldn&#x27;t that sort of bring back the internet to how it used to be before all non-technical people started using it. Because the people who would actually put down the extra money to get access to all sites would probably be those who really care about technology, freedom and so on.<p>If the rest of the internet outside these free basic services was small enough there might also be a lot less pressure from industries about copyright and so on because it wouldn&#x27;t be worth it for them.<p>So in the end it might actually lead to that the internet would be a lot more free in the way it used to be and the people would be more caring.<p>Could that happen?
======
grawprog
"The rest of the internet" as you call it. Depends on the traffic of people
coming to it. If most people don't bother than those sites won't make money
and will shutdown. That's assuming it will still be possible to pay for an
account that allows you to host a website or access your host. The internet is
not just a bunch of content providers. It's a communication network.

~~~
varmeljus
Yes but people have also been running things voluntarily before, and there can
still be donations and so on.

But "That's assuming it will still be possible to pay for an account that
allows you to host a website or access your host."

Do you think that they wont at all offer access to all of the internet to
private citizens or at unreasonable cost? They might of course do either, but
I personally believe ( maybe naively ) they will because they can make money
but I might be wrong.

~~~
grawprog
It's not just about changing to a tiered internet. They want to change the
fundamental way it works from a connected network where you or I can send and
receive any packets we want to any other machine connected. They want to
change it to a system similar to cable where information is provided only from
certain sources. If packets are monitored and metered they can decide what
machines you are allowed to communicate with and the kind of communication you
are allowed. They can charge you depending on what you look at, block anything
from competitors and monitor everything you do. Right now, I could host my own
webserver, pay for a domain name and ooen my server on port 80 and anyone
could connect to that machine. If my server became popular i'd probably need
to pay for more bandwidth but that's about it.

If there was no net neutrality they could charge me anything they wanted to do
that or just outright stop me. They could add whatever terms they wanted to
'hosting' accounts or whatever they call it. They could remove my website for
posting content they disagree with.

And when I say they I mean ISP's whose sole function should be to provide
access ro the communication network that is the internet, not be the
gatekeepers of global communication.

The internet is far more than people hosting content for other people to
consume. But they're trying really hard to turn it into nothing more than
that.

I grew up with dialup internet where you got charged by the webpage. Fucked if
I'm going back to that.

~~~
varmeljus
Thank you, that post brought more insights in how they want to change it in a
way that I hadn't thought about much. My view was more black and white, some
basic internet or all internet.

I need some time to think about this, but I will probably be back later or
tomorrow.

Thank you again.

