4 ms·

This is insanely wordy. I would appreciate a TL;DR;

by roesel 9y ago

_nalply 9y ago
Each communication technology tends to cycle through phases: Invention, pioneering, commercialisation, lock-down and obsolescence: telegram, telephone, radio, cinema, TV, etc. Internet is in the lock-down phase if net neutrality is not enforced. Without net neutrality providers can split the Internet into channels and make bundles out of channels, like this: Base Internet $29.95 plus International sites $5 plus news $5, and so on. This way they can make more money. However this will force out the long tail (niche content) and force us into walled gardens and in the future even get us an Internet as locked-down as China's. This is not capitalism, but corporatism. We should fight the lock-down by donating to specific non-profits, educate about the open Internet, contact representatives and share the article. Perhaps one should make a tl;dr out of this?
- louithethrid 9y ago
  TL;DR now costs extra, because im some important pipe-part of the thread stack, and demand money to squeeze it down further.
- losteric 9y ago
  tl;dr: Rent-seeking edit: seriously though, read the article... it's not long
gumby 9y ago
It's only about 8,000 words. Long by Buzzfeed standards, short by The New York Review of books.
bootload 9y ago
"This is insanely wordy. I would appreciate a TL;DR;" Start here: "How to Read a Paper" ~ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14228912 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14228912 Is it that hard to read the title and the first 100 words. In papers this is usually the abstract. If you can't find the meaning inside the first one hundred or so words it is waffle and may not be worth reading. Here is a hint. Network neutrality, enshrined in law, is under attack by large ISP companies for control and profit. There are precedents in our technology history. Tech companies are not run by benevolent skivvied, sandal wearing hippies, who hang around the Dalai Lama in their spare time to be enlightened. If you disagree with my editorialising, that's what happens if you ask someone else to re-interpret the story. Read the entire article instead.
endgame 9y ago
It's also well written and rolls along at a decent pace.

This is insanely wordy. I would appreciate a TL;DR;

by roesel 9y ago

This is insanely wordy. I would appreciate a TL;DR;

Each communication technology tends to cycle through phases: Invention, pioneering, commercialisation, lock-down and obsolescence: telegram, telephone, radio, cinema, TV, etc. Internet is in the lock-down phase if net neutrality is not enforced. Without net neutrality providers can split the Internet into channels and make bundles out of channels, like this: Base Internet $29.95 plus International sites $5 plus news $5, and so on. This way they can make more money. However this will force out the long tail (niche content) and force us into walled gardens and in the future even get us an Internet as locked-down as China's. This is not capitalism, but corporatism. We should fight the lock-down by donating to specific non-profits, educate about the open Internet, contact representatives and share the article. Perhaps one should make a tl;dr out of this?

louithethrid 9y ago
TL;DR now costs extra, because im some important pipe-part of the thread stack, and demand money to squeeze it down further.
losteric 9y ago
tl;dr: Rent-seeking edit: seriously though, read the article... it's not long

gumby 9y ago

It's only about 8,000 words. Long by Buzzfeed standards, short by The New York Review of books.

bootload 9y ago

"This is insanely wordy. I would appreciate a TL;DR;" Start here: "How to Read a Paper" ~ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14228912 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14228912 Is it that hard to read the title and the first 100 words. In papers this is usually the abstract. If you can't find the meaning inside the first one hundred or so words it is waffle and may not be worth reading. Here is a hint. Network neutrality, enshrined in law, is under attack by large ISP companies for control and profit. There are precedents in our technology history. Tech companies are not run by benevolent skivvied, sandal wearing hippies, who hang around the Dalai Lama in their spare time to be enlightened. If you disagree with my editorialising, that's what happens if you ask someone else to re-interpret the story. Read the entire article instead.

endgame 9y ago

It's also well written and rolls along at a decent pace.