In the news

[weaktwos]

First, from The Onion, "School Shootings Help Prepare Students for Being Shot in Real World". Heh. I'm sure it's quite true. Of course PTSD may be involved, as well.

So the Justice Department is saying that Internet Providers should be able to charge for priority web traffic. What does this mean, exactly? I'm already paying $50 or more a

Comments

Net Neutrality

[imlac]

The proposal isn't that they charge users (like you) who surf the net, they're charging content providers, people who make websites. So, for example, if 500,000 people a month visit Slate.com, the ISP charges them $X; if 1,000,000 a month visit google, they're charged $2X (or whatever.) If they don't pay, they don't get cut off, but service to the site slows down dramatically.

This is a very serious issue, and to be perfectly honest, I'm not sure what to think about it. On the one hand, those against letting ISPs charge more for more traffic (those in favor of net neutrality) bring up some scary scenarios regarding censorship, bias, and the un-democratizing of the internet. On the other hand, those opposed to net neutrality argue these scenarios are just paranoia, and that free-market principles will lead to much better internet service for all. I'm still trying to figure it out. You should look into it.