Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Server vs. client (Score 1) 270

>>>Could they just as easily charge you directly?

Comcast users can't get access to ESPN360.com or Disneyconnection.com, because Comcast didn't pay the access fee. I'd certainly say "yes" it's easier to pay with credit card and gain access, than to be completely blocked under the current situation.

And you might think this is just two websites, but what if the idea catches-on such that Comcast customers can no longer access youtube.com or hulu.com because Comcast chose not to pay those sites required fees? What do people do then? In many areas this company holds a monopoly.

The ultimate decision of what websites customers can access, or not access, should not be in the ISP's hands.
It should be for the customer to decide. Power to the people.

A situation like that would likely precipitate other companies seeing the opportunities for customers (the comcast subscribers) and making their own services, something as ubiquitous as youtube practicing this kind of policy would suddenly find its ubiquity usurped by someone not restricting themselves to isp's willing to pay.

Comment An interesting statement from MS (Score 1) 205

Why is this in YRO? this is a GOOD thing. Granted, Microsoft could do well to make it harder for these entities to survive by virtue of changes to their OS, but there's only so much you can do to curb the naivety of the average user. Not that there's a whole lot that will come out of something like this, I suspect that most of these ads come from a jurisdiction that cares little for American Jurisprudence.

Slashdot Top Deals

Say "twenty-three-skiddoo" to logout.

Working...