Home

Tue, Apr. 25th, 2006, 10:21 pm

Here's the skinny on that 'email tax' panic that's been floating around. Clue courtesy of [info]seebs.

Misinformation memes do us all a disservice by wasting our time and attention, sapping our emotional energy, and ultimately training us to be apathetic. If you ever feel a cause is important enough to spread the word about, be sure to include links to reputable, informed sources so people can check out the background on it themselves. And if you're going to be calling for some action, such as petitions, be sure that action is correctly targeted and effective. For instance, I've seen people urging their friends to petition AOL; AOL is a for-profit corporation, folks. Those don't respond to petitions. There is absolutely no point in petitioning them. Use some common sense.
Tags: , ,
 Leave a comment

Wed, Apr. 26th, 2006 04:00 am (UTC)
[info]uminomamori

I wonder about this one then, http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet/
Thread - Reply

Wed, Apr. 26th, 2006 04:52 am (UTC)
[info]gomichan

I'm suspicious. All the links they provide are to people responding to the rumor. I'd have to dig elsewhere to find whether anything's actually happening. Even if it is, I'd say they're underestimating the power of free-market forces in this situation; there are a LOT of small providers out there. Seebs and I run one. I can tell you, if the bigwigs started cockblocking small companies, our business would boom.
Parent - Thread - Reply

Wed, Apr. 26th, 2006 05:44 am (UTC)
(Anonymous)

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/neutrality.asp - snopes says true.
Parent - Thread - Reply

Wed, Apr. 26th, 2006 06:25 am (UTC)
[info]seebs

Partially true. Network neutrality is not currently mandated. I would not call it the "first amendment", though; it's not even comparable. There has never been a right to speech-without-cost, only to speech without content restrictions, and no such restrictions are on the table.

The objection I have to the cable companies trying to charge content providers is that it's double-dipping. That said, I don't really think this is a substantial issue; internet pricing is totally incoherent right now, and there's no distinction between upstream and downstream bandwidth.

In practice, no one's going to completely block traffic from small companies, and small companies are generally buying bandwidth from upstream companies, who will cover this and pass on costs. I think it's a non-issue.

However, unlike the email tax, they're not lying, and their position is at least somewhat justifiable and consistent with reality.
Parent - Thread - Reply

Wed, Apr. 26th, 2006 06:29 am (UTC)
[info]seebs

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/emailtax.asp

Snopes debunks the email tax, too.
Thread - Reply

Wed, Apr. 26th, 2006 04:05 pm (UTC)
[info]darc_kitty: Psst ... (irrelevant to current conversation)

I can't see any of you art at: http://chartreuse.studiowhippingboy.com/gallery2/main.php I get an error.

Sorry if it's me.
Thread - Reply

Wed, Apr. 26th, 2006 05:36 pm (UTC)
[info]seebs: Re: Psst ... (irrelevant to current conversation)

Fixed.
Parent - Thread - Reply

Thu, Apr. 27th, 2006 01:12 am (UTC)
[info]rinichan: Re: Psst ... (irrelevant to current conversation)

No, I was getting that too, but I completely didn't think of posting here *or* in Riverside. Kudos.
Parent - Thread - Reply