The End of the Internet as We Know It? - Page 3

**leerock89** · 10-17-2008

I say we burn it to the ground!! That's right burn internet!!! It doesn't deserve to live!!

**analogZero** · 10-17-2008

Google and all other search engines would be in for trouble in this case too. being able to surf through a 'free' search engine it this case would turn into nothing more than window shopping. "oh that site looks nice, but I'd better see what else there is before I throw my money away". This is bad business for search engines and a headache for web optimization. It would dampen SE use plain and simple, and I'd love to see google say 'sure just dig a hatchet into our business, by all means'. messenger programs and software updating would be restricted as well?
And with a near myriad of sites to choose from, who's to say what you'd get from a package deal. Do executives really think they can choose from an endless supply of websites to determine what's best for the consumer? Even if you were to look at mainstream sites it would still overwhelm the options available to television in creating bundles and packages.
Point being somebody has to implement these restrictions and that organization is not immune to legal or political pressure. If you're in america and your service provider says your site is 'pay-per-view' you can legally attack the service provider. This would have to be a government run operation and in order to do that they'd have to act as a semi-dictatorship in order to make this work. I'm sorry, but it seems like something a bunch of hippy nerds would talk about in some random dude's backyard. I'm all for conspiracy theories, but this just doesn't seem logical for me as it is.

**Bee_Chan** · 10-17-2008

I guess everyone will just have to wait and see what happened in the year 2012.
If we all die, *shrug* we die?

**BlueSano** · 10-17-2008

one thing is for sure IF this really happened... the libraries will be PACKED !!!!!...... and it is believable at some level .... but the loss would be greater than the gain .... so i don't see why would they do this move..... i mean if it comes to this ... they would lose more than half the world ...and the dites would go down .... especially search engines as some of you have mentioned .... and of course some one will figure out a way to hack it ... or keep the old internet system going .... so why go through all this trouble ?.... i could believe that some of the major sites could release packages or "extra pachages" for ppl who want to have more privilages ...or for some sort of extra sirvice ..while keeping the original "free" site going .. that way they could gain more .... how ever ...if this really happen i would never pay ...and i would look for alternative ways to get my "entertainment" .

**Zaraki** · 10-17-2008

just sounds like they are trying to stir things up. oh well we will see.

**Dolly** · 10-17-2008

While I...don't think the world is going to end in 2012, I'm not as skeptical into thinking the internet will undergo some great change in the form of money one way or another. Personally, I find it inevitable sooner or later.

**a2ng0d** · 10-17-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by analogZero

Google and all other search engines would be in for trouble in this case too. being able to surf through a 'free' search engine it this case would turn into nothing more than window shopping. "oh that site looks nice, but I'd better see what else there is before I throw my money away". This is bad business for search engines and a headache for web optimization. It would dampen SE use plain and simple, and I'd love to see google say 'sure just dig a hatchet into our business, by all means'. messenger programs and software updating would be restricted as well?
And with a near myriad of sites to choose from, who's to say what you'd get from a package deal. Do executives really think they can choose from an endless supply of websites to determine what's best for the consumer? Even if you were to look at mainstream sites it would still overwhelm the options available to television in creating bundles and packages.
Point being somebody has to implement these restrictions and that organization is not immune to legal or political pressure. If you're in america and your service provider says your site is 'pay-per-view' you can legally attack the service provider. This would have to be a government run operation and in order to do that they'd have to act as a semi-dictatorship in order to make this work. I'm sorry, but it seems like something a bunch of hippy nerds would talk about in some random dude's backyard. I'm all for conspiracy theories, but this just doesn't seem logical for me as it is.

I also do not find it logical that google and others would submit themselves to that. Well not now, at least.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueSano

one thing is for sure IF this really happened... the libraries will be PACKED !!!!!...... and it is believable at some level .... but the loss would be greater than the gain .... so i don't see why would they do this move..... i mean if it comes to this ... they would lose more than half the world ...and the dites would go down .... especially search engines as some of you have mentioned .... and of course some one will figure out a way to hack it ... or keep the old internet system going .... so why go through all this trouble ?.... i could believe that some of the major sites could release packages or "extra pachages" for ppl who want to have more privilages ...or for some sort of extra sirvice ..while keeping the original "free" site going .. that way they could gain more .... how ever ...if this really happen i would never pay ...and i would look for alternative ways to get my "entertainment" .

Well yeah thats the whole point, they want people off the internet. In a previous post, i stated that a friend of mine in the IT field said that the world will undergo a global server crash at this rate of more and more people surfing the web. It makes sense, in a way. If too many people are on at one time, the internet will simply crash, sending businesses and everything else net related into the 9th level of Hell. They are trying to prevent that, so they gotta find a way to reduce the number of people going online, so apparently this is their solution. Like i stated before, it solves one problem, but i think there has to be a better way to stop the supposed 2012 net "crash" without bringing for a 2012 net "restriction".

**analogZero** · 10-18-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by a2ng0d

Well yeah thats the whole point, they want people off the internet. In a previous post, i stated that a friend of mine in the IT field said that the world will undergo a global server crash at this rate of more and more people surfing the web. It makes sense, in a way. If too many people are on at one time, the internet will simply crash, sending businesses and everything else net related into the 9th level of Hell. They are trying to prevent that, so they gotta find a way to reduce the number of people going online, so apparently this is their solution. Like i stated before, it solves one problem, but i think there has to be a better way to stop the supposed 2012 net "crash" without bringing for a 2012 net "restriction".

So I gotta get into reading books more is what you're saying...

xXWENWENXx · 10-18-2008

as the old internet ends..a better version of internet might come up
but i still can't survive wif out internet
but we onli go 4 yrs to live so "meh.."

**Zaraki** · 10-18-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by xXWENWENXx

as the old internet ends..a better version of internet might come up
but i still can't survive wif out internet
but we onli go 4 yrs to live so "meh.."

yeah i heard on g4 a "super internet" was being developed.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)