Post-packet era of the Internet in Russia, another likely scenario

There is a lot of speculation about the final cost of storing traffic, but all these speculations agree that while maintaining the current tariffs, you can not build data centers, but simply turn off the business and leave the market.

There are three ways to resolve the issue:

• increase in the cost of tariffs by the most modest calculations - by 2-3 times, by the most nightmarish - by 10 times
• the abolition of unlimited tariffs and the reduction of channels - representatives of major providers are already beginning to talk about this; something above 10 Mb / s can probably be forgotten
• the combination of the first two paths is the most likely

Where to go users? Nowhere, the market can not offer another. This is not a complete article, but rather a forecast note. Himself forecast under the cut.

This creates an excellent situation for the government to monopolize another industry. It is quite likely that a public provider will appear on the wreckage of the former expanse, which will be exempt from complying with traffic storage regulations, and, therefore, will be able to provide the same conditions that we now have for each of the first private providers. Against the background of private providers, with the development of events under consideration, these will be extremely favorable conditions.
')
Current providers are not keen to comply with blocking laws. As a rule, their blocking methods are easily managed, and providers rarely combine different methods. Some providers even allow themselves to completely ignore blacklists, although there are fewer of them (and perhaps they no longer have, and my data is outdated).

In the case of a public provider, this situation can drastically and dramatically change. All types of locks will be applied at the same time. A detour will be extremely difficult, if possible at all.

The need for blacklists will remain purely formal. In fact, this provider will be able, without any legal basis, to block everything he needs, without any comments.

Moreover, the state provider can openly easily block all types of vpn and all mesh networks, which is technically quite possible. At the same time, he can make exceptions for legal entities ... for a fee after providing the encryption keys. Or by providing your own service.

With that, I stress, all this without any need for a legislative framework. Want - use, do not want - do not use. A monopolist can afford this behavior without any image consequences. Moreover, the law does not directly prohibit such behavior.

Why does such a provider risk becoming a monopolist?

The average user will not understand the nuances, and will use the services of the office that will provide the most favorable conditions.

Those who will still climb into the jungle can be neglected, they are within the limits of statistical error.

Thus, in fact, this provider will very quickly become a monopolist with a huge share of Internet users in Russia, and private traders will get even worse.

Where does this provider take the infrastructure?

The current providers will gladly sell him this infrastructure or its elements, since, given the development of events under consideration, they simply will not need their current infrastructure. Or most of it. Well, we should not exclude that, for example, Rostelecom, which already has an extensive infrastructure, may well fit the role of such a state provider.

Why so hard? Why not just ban the vpn and mesh networks by law, and deal with the end?

Then, which is again gently and quietly cooked frog. Direct blocking of vpn at the legislative level can result in unnecessary image troubles for the government, while in the scheme with the state monopoly provider, the benefit is at least double (another pocket monopolist company with huge profits in the pocket of the person close to the emperor , unpunished total locks in a row - I will keep silence about the background of locks, it is clear to the majority) and without any risks.

Why, then, the entire current circus with horses blocking?

Probably banal approbation of locking methods and workarounds. The main profit is that you don’t have to do anything yourself, all the providers have done in terms of developing locking methods and users in circumventing methods.

In addition, if we accept that such a plan of action, as described in the note, does exist - it could not be born immediately. All the same, the story spins more than one year, and long-term planning is not about our government.

Why did you suddenly need to look for the “left” meaning in the amendments of the Spring package?

Because in its present form, these amendments do not bear any direct meaning. The results of traffic collection will be, to put it mildly, problematic. The law does not provide for its processing.

UPD: Furriest user comment gives reason to believe that in such a situation, private traders can no longer be needed by anyone and die off from the industry in a natural way.

It's just another prediction of the likely development of events, nothing more. I do not call anyone for anything, including believing this article. The only thing - please, if possible, comment on your view on the likelihood of such a development.