Necratoid, not too stupid to use the scroll bar? Sunshine, I wouldnt believe you capable of breathing without a walkman and a looped taped instructing you to inhale and exhale. However, as I am addressing specific points, I will lay them out to ease confusion.
Necra-quote: The only thing that would oppress it is if the companies do it themselves.
Of course they will do it themselves. Fiduciary responsibility dictates this. If you can screw your competition by denying or restricting access to their services, or provide an additional layer of difficulty in accessing those services, you do it. That is fiduciary ethics. That is how business works. This is why there is such a big deal with Microsoft and anti-competitive processes.
Necra-quote: His boss had a hand in making it unsafe for the children flooding the internet.
Do you let any child out in an unsupervised area and expect them to be safe? Crank open the can of Maxwell house and slam your snout into it. Do you let them out onto the streets to run about without supervision; or without ground rules. You might have heard them. Look both ways before your cross. Dont talk to strangers. Dont eat the yellow snow? The police are also available to ensure that the rules are followed; but the police are not responsible for your children. You are.
Necratoid The money in nerfing the internet is in selling software to protect the children.
Are totally ignorant? The money in this new model is gained by offering competition leg-ups to deep pocket corporations and services that want to be sure that their traffic has priority over all other traffic. Legislate the need; and then fulfill it. Net-Nanny software is a mere drop in the bucket. It is an economic non-starter, especially when compared to office business software, anti-virus, etc. So no, protecting the children is not the money-shot in nerfing the internet. Children are also not the problem with the internet. Parents letting them use it unsupervised are.
Necra-quote: The only thing that would oppress it is if the companies do it themselves.
Of course they will do it themselves. Fiduciary responsibility dictates this. If you can screw your competition by denying or restricting access to their services, or provide an additional layer of difficulty in accessing those services, you do it. That is fiduciary ethics. That is how business works. This is why there is such a big deal with Microsoft and anti-competitive processes.
Necra-quote: His boss had a hand in making it unsafe for the children flooding the internet.
Do you let any child out in an unsupervised area and expect them to be safe? Crank open the can of Maxwell house and slam your snout into it. Do you let them out onto the streets to run about without supervision; or without ground rules. You might have heard them. Look both ways before your cross. Dont talk to strangers. Dont eat the yellow snow? The police are also available to ensure that the rules are followed; but the police are not responsible for your children. You are.
Necratoid The money in nerfing the internet is in selling software to protect the children.
Are totally ignorant? The money in this new model is gained by offering competition leg-ups to deep pocket corporations and services that want to be sure that their traffic has priority over all other traffic. Legislate the need; and then fulfill it. Net-Nanny software is a mere drop in the bucket. It is an economic non-starter, especially when compared to office business software, anti-virus, etc. So no, protecting the children is not the money-shot in nerfing the internet. Children are also not the problem with the internet. Parents letting them use it unsupervised are.