The American company providing telephone services and Internet AT&T just released an incredibly fast fiber-optic internet service in Kansas City for 70 dollars a month.
But the new is not that: customers who do not want the telecom giant to spy on them during their web surfing will have to pay extra 29 dollars.
In other words, a dubious preservation of online personal life will cost around 350 dollars a year.
Lustiness on the part of the company, or straightness, this will be judged by each of you.
The question is whether there can be such an agreement. Is it fair for AT&T to force consumers to protect themselves by paying a price?
The answer for the romance of the internet is probably not. But for other rationalists the answer is yes. Choosing your paid privacy assurance seems rather harsh, but the Internet has been working this way so far.
Η Google, και το Facebook για παράδειγμα προσφέρουν “δωρεάν” υπηρεσίες που στην πραγματικότητα δεν είναι καθόλου δωρεάν. Το αντίτιμο δεν μετριέται με χρήματα αλλά με τα προσωπικά μας στοιχεία.
AT&T just makes it more open. Do you want protection? Pay.
In the future, it is very likely that we will see more companies doing the same.
At a time when it is now known that the Internet is a big crowd of global gathering and collecting information from secret and non-service, many will think of doing the same.
The question is whether they can do it, since entire governments have failed and laws seem to be powerless in the new virtual environment.
Is the paid protection of our privacy the solution that stops the collection of information from the secret services or from the advertisers?
I do not think.
We have seen that the on-lineThe world is very "open." Nothing can be hidden, and even if it manages to do so, there will always be someone who manages to discover a loophole. In addition, advertising agencies and secret services are constantly discovering new ways to collect data.
Would you pay for such a service?
