I"m asking this for when net neutrality ends. Will ISPs start charging extra money for services like apt to access Linux distribution repos?

Errrr. And that ISP is? My Windstream provider dropped into line when I threatened to go with another provider.

Even got money back and new wireless router and they boosted the signal on their server end even.

Aren't you in Canada?

Isn't your ISP in Canada?

1 members found this post helpful.

Yes, but the central repos are in the US, and they need an ISP to be accessible to me, and cost rolls downhill.

Debain has a mirror in Canada.

-->http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/

At least you should be OK for a mirror at home.

If you look here -->https://www.debian.org/mirror/list there are mirrors in many other countries, outside of the madness of Trump.

1 members found this post helpful.

One immediate consequence of the "net neutrality" acts by AT&T and Comcast – neither one of which can really afford to keep on losing their public-relations battles – is that the local electrical power utility and all of the local phone companies immediately put up billboards advertising how their services were "neutral" and always would be. (And, substantially faster without compression tricks.) They specifically offered deep discounts if you switched from Comcast. (As I had done many years ago, just as soon as an alternative presented itself.)

No, one way or the other, there will never be a "paywall" put in front of the world-wide(!) web. The only thing that will happen will be that Comcast and AT&T continue to lose market share – now even faster than before.

My
"net neutrality" was a regulation/law that "prohibited" ISPs from charging for bandwith usage.
Not having the law doesn't mean that ISPs will charge for usage, it only means (as sundialsvcs already said) that the market will control what happens. I agree that charging for usage will eventually cost more in lost revenue than not doing that.

A more likely scenario is that predatory ISPs will throttle popular big media providers, such as Netflix, unless they pay a premium for a "fast lane."

This looks like a pretty good article addressing the issue. http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/11/w...y-is-gone.html

Under that scenario, consumers will end up somehow paying a premium, but it will be indirect.

Yep. That possibility (which has been discussed for years) is central to the Net Neutrality discussion.

Netflix's position? They're opposed to "fast lanes". Even for themselves.

The Misconception About Internet Fast Lanes

Toll-road providers tried that once, and they got keel-hauled before the Interstate Commerce Commission.

The first day any of these companies actually try to do these things, they'll be similarly hauled-up for interference with interstate commerce and probably also wire fraud. And laws will be formally handed down to declare that internet communications, just like telephone service, is a "common carrier."

Is there any chance of the Debian maintainers being forced to pass on the increased cost of enabling the core repo to be mirrored in other countries (since I assume the mirrors get their packages from the core repo and the maintainers could get charged a premium by their own ISP)?

You mean other than by having donation drives more often?

No.