Google-Verizon Deal: The End of The Internet as We Know It

[kramer]

From the HuffingtonPost:

For years, Internet advocates have warned of the doomsday scenario that will play out on Monday: Google and Verizon will announce a deal that the New York Times reports "could allow Verizon to speed some online content to Internet users more quickly if the content's creators are willing to pay for the privilege."

The deal marks the beginning of the end of the Internet as you know it. Since its beginnings, the Net was a level playing field that allowed all content to move at the same speed, whether it's ABC News or your uncle's video blog. That's all about to change, and the result couldn't be more bleak for the future of the Internet, for television, radio and independent voices.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-silv ... 71617.html

[John Q. Public]

Google seems to have forgotten its motto. Considering that a few of its properties - YouTube, in particular - could never have gotten off the ground with tiered speeds, this sounds pretty darned "evil" to me.

[Parrotpaul]

John McCain introduced a bill last fall that supports this move.

John McCain moves to change Internet neutrality

[MDDad]

On the other hand, tiered speeds and the Google/Verizon agreement shouldn't have any effect on this site. Many times I can download military secrets from Tajikistan faster than I can open a thread or post a one-word response here.

[Parrotpaul]

John McCain introduced a bill last fall that supports this move.

John McCain moves to change Internet neutrality

More on McCain's bill

[John Q. Public]

On the other hand, tiered speeds and the Google/Verizon agreement shouldn't have any effect on this site. Many times I can download military secrets from Tajikistan faster than I can open a thread or post a one-word response here.

Yeah, I know. Especially in the last week or so. See my announcement. But once you manage to connect, the site's pretty damned fast. I've hit more than a meg/second doing file transfers. That's way faster than most.

[GOODave]

Yeah, I know. Especially in the last week or so. See my announcement. But once you manage to connect, the site's pretty damned fast. I've hit more than a meg/second doing file transfers. That's way faster than most.

But that says the speeds will be increased if the owners of the content want to pay for the privilege.

I'm sure you'll want to take the HEFTY earnings you get from this site and pay for the higher speeds, right?

[MDDad]

Yeah, I know. Especially in the last week or so. See my announcement. But once you manage to connect, the site's pretty damned fast. I've hit more than a meg/second doing file transfers. That's way faster than most.

I agree, when it works, it's fast. But hitting a meg/second on one post, and then grinding for a minute before timing out to an error message on the next makes for a bad overall average. I sure hope your change makes things better.

[John Q. Public]

But that says the speeds will be increased if the owners of the content want to pay for the privilege.

I'm sure you'll want to take the HEFTY earnings you get from this site and pay for the higher speeds, right?

Yeah ok hefty. 4 cents yesterday and zip on the new ads since they started.

But the problem with this type of agreement is that it's fine for now as far as low-bandwidth sites go, but what happens in 5 years, when even sites like this one will probably be using more an more power and more and more bandwidth? Websites and applications always expand to use whatever power/storage/bandwidth is available, so you know it's bound to happen at one point or another.

And what of YouTube's competitors or businesses like Skype that need the bandwidth now? It sounds like extortion to me.

[GOODave]

Yeah ok hefty. 4 cents yesterday and zip on the new ads since they started.

But the problem with this type of agreement is that it's fine for now as far as low-bandwidth sites go, but what happens in 5 years, when even sites like this one will probably be using more an more power and more and more bandwidth? Websites and applications always expand to use whatever power/storage/bandwidth is available, so you know it's bound to happen at one point or another.

And what of YouTube's competitors or businesses like Skype that need the bandwidth now? It sounds like extortion to me.

Sounds like extortion to me too... and probably more than a little trust violation going on stifling that competition as well.

I was only kidding about the "hefty" earnings. You've mentioned previously it really isn't the cash cow some might think it is.

[John Q. Public]

Yeah, I know. Especially in the last week or so. See my announcement. But once you manage to connect, the site's pretty damned fast. I've hit more than a meg/second doing file transfers. That's way faster than most.

1.4 megs/sec downloading the backups - and that was by HTTP, which is slower than FTP. Who says the site's slow?

Hee hee. I still remember the time it took me a day and a half to download a 50 meg file! But, considering that that was almost a reasonable speed back then, I don't want to think about how much extra it might cost in another 10 years to achieve comparable speeds to what we have now.

[John Q. Public]

I was only kidding about the "hefty" earnings. You've mentioned previously it really isn't the cash cow some might think it is.

Woo hoo! A nickel today! Honey, grab the kids! We're going to Vegas!

And thanks to whoever it was for the 1¢ click. <groan>

[SoMelo]

Woo hoo! A nickel today! Honey, grab the kids! We're going to Vegas!

And thanks to whoever it was for the 1¢ click. <groan>

I just clicked on the penny website.. Not sure what it's about but if I save the Link I can check it out later

[John Q. Public]

I just clicked on the penny website.. Not sure what it's about but if I save the Link I can check it out later

That was one of the ads here? Odd linkages on it. It seems to be an affiliate "mall" that links to another affiliate mall that might link to another affiliate mall... and eventually, it will link to an actual seller - just like the ones on the small banners here. It's probably safe, though. I'm guessing that the first one or two steps are probably run by some poor SOBs that clicked one of the "Make money sitting at home and doing nothing" banners and believed it. Sorta like a low budget version of the "Get rich buying and selling real estate" deals from a few years ago.

Never did see anything about any auctions, though.

*Word of warning: I'm considering doing something similar on another site but with only one hop - and with, I'm sure, much more realistic expectations.

[SoMelo]

That was one of the ads here? Odd linkages on it. It seems to be an affiliate "mall" that links to another affiliate mall that might link to another affiliate mall... and eventually, it will link to an actual seller - just like the ones on the small banners here. It's probably safe, though. I'm guessing that the first one or two steps are probably run by some poor SOBs that clicked one of the "Make money sitting at home and doing nothing" banners and believed it. Sorta like a low budget version of the "Get rich buying and selling real estate" deals from a few years ago.

Never did see anything about any auctions, though.

*Word of warning: I'm considering doing something similar on another site but with only one hop - and with, I'm sure, much more realistic expectations.

So do you get a ¢ for every attached link clicked on?

[John Q. Public]

So do you get a ¢ for every attached link clicked on?

The average for the text links is around 6¢, which is what yours paid. I've been thinking about dropping them except they're the ones that get clicked more often. Not that 70¢ last month made any kind of difference. We still didn't make the minimum to get paid.

The banners can pay a little better - or they can not pay at all. The ones that pay by exposures don't pay anything if they're clicked. And it seems that half of the campaigns will have at least one of each type, and there's no way of telling which is which. The ones that do pay by the click generally pay anywhere from a couple cents to maybe a quarter, except there was one last month that paid a whopping 50¢. Most of the "income" comes from exposures but still, it's a very good month when they pay enough to cover the hosting charge.