• BCsven@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      ·
      11 days ago

      It would only be good if it was a tax that would force websites to be simple like the 90s to reduce all the garbage data a website loads nowadays.

  • 00000@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    Please stop reposting this fake news.

    This was “passed” by 10 socialists, out of a 577-person council, who held an essentially secret vote to guarantee the proposal was “approved.” This is a political trick. No one supports this. It will not pass.

    In the U.S. this would be like if the 3 representatives from Wyoming and the Dakotas had a slumber party and the “caucus” decided to push a bill that required all children in the country to read the bible before going to bed, and then everyone on the internet started saying “U.S. lawmakers approve bill to force children to read the bible!!!” There’s a ridiculous amount of information being intentionally left out of that headline to get you to click it, and to encourage lazy “I only read the headline” and updoot farmers like the OP to repost it.

    Here is an article that actually explains this, not some dried up old internet message board desperate for clicks. https://tech-insider.org/french-lawmakers-per-gigabyte-internet-traffic-tax-11-10-vote-2026/

    PROTIP: If something on the internet outrages you or seems completely insane, it’s probably fake. Spend 10 seconds in Google before freaking out in comments and being an easily manipulated rube.

  • eicker@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    11 days ago

    France looked at internet connections people already pay for and thought: what if we taxed the contents too? Apparently the only thing that should be unlimited is the government’s appetite for new revenue. And somehow they’re surprised when people suggest the bill will end up with consumers.

    • BeatTakeshi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      11 days ago

      “No no no stupid people, we don’t tax you, we tax the data”. Obviously this government will neeeeeeeever tax the rich

    • ravenaspiring@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 days ago

      It would be making the companies pay for their delivery of content, so not a direct payment by the customer. Companies play to play for access to French citizens. How the companies deal with that is hugely variable, but think of this as a step towards wealth tax.

      Also France desperately needs more revenue as it is nearing a debt crisis on it’s own, which might be some of what is behind this.

  • Waterpumpee@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    11 days ago

    There certainly wont be a way to tanper with this, right? Like nobody would maliciously start to load content from a platform now just to increase their bill.

    • inconel@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 days ago

      Aren’t platform’s loaded contents just ads? Increasing their bill or let my pc download their ads, will be a tough choice.

  • ElectricVocalist@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    It’s basically an internet shutdown disguised as a tax. If it applied only to GAFAM I would support it, let’s get them out of the market

  • ravenaspiring@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    11 days ago

    France has approved a proposed tax that aims to tax the amount of internet data per gigabyte sent to French users in the country, with major companies like Google, Netflix, TikTok, and Meta now in the crosshairs. According to minutes released by the National Assembly, members voted 11-10 in support of the motion on October 30 — which now means the new law has been added to the country’s next budget, despite major opposition from the government side and the finance committee rapporteur. The law still has to pass through the Senate for final approval. The latest amendment, introduced by socialist lawmaker Laurent Lhardit, could see content providers pay €0.055 (roughly $0.06) to the government for every gigabyte of content distributed to French users.

    So not the end user directly, but the companies who deliver the content. Like a fee to access France’s users, pay to play.

    • AliOski@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 days ago

      Won’t pass the Senate, the National Assembly has many more members than just 21

  • SabinStargem@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    11 days ago

    This makes no bloody sense. Either the pipe is in use, or it isn’t. The “water” itself is infinite, so long as the device on the other end has electricity. I assume people in France already pay their electric bill.

  • Decq@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    11 days ago

    Couldn’t this be abused? What’s stopping me from using a VPN node in France and downloading terabytes from google, meta, etc.? But I guess they will start capping traffic to French addresses.

  • TheRiskiestBiscuit@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 days ago

    I don’t support doing this legislatively, but there should be a greater incentive to optimize storage size and bandwidth. Broadband has made us far too comfortable with unnecessarily large files and inefficient compression.

    • AliOski@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      I fear for the day that France goes bankrupt and the EU goes down with them… The Netherlands has been so strict with its budgeting and it would all go to waste thanks to France.