|
from my understanding there appears to be a potential tiered system of service.
the more you pay the better your service, IE: your requests get priority.
I don't think it's going to be a pay-per-bandwidth type of thing. at least, it better not be. But i havent read anything in that regards.
kind of like buying a car
i spent more money on a gt when i could have settled for a v6 mustang instead. I'm paying for a faster car...
I'm not sure how i feel... i can go both ways on the issue.
on one hand, these companies are spending a ton of money building the infrastructure and should be able to charge as they see fit and should be able to accept money from customers and advertisers for preferential treatment.
on the other hand... i don't want to see my service degenerate because of this and i certainly don't want to be denied access to various internet sources because i'm not paying a premium or because comcast, for instance, doesnt have a contract with say... yahoo and block all of the websites owned by them.
i feel the potential for blocking content is far more nefarious than preferential treatment and something i am far more concerned about.
and it's a crying shame people can't be upset about something without others attempting to downplay the importance of an issue because they deem it unimportant to themselves.
this is a big issue for me... being in IT... being in web development. what if comcast decides to block all of my employer's websites unless they pay a large fee? and what if my company is unable to pay that fee? what if comcast decides to block the companies i generally use to host my websites?
|