Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > VOIP > The Demise of Cheap VOIP

Reply
Thread Tools

The Demise of Cheap VOIP

 
 
Vox Humana
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-10-2005

"Heimo Hetl" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Cmage.1735$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Vox Humana wrote:
>
> > There is always broadband over power line. Virtually everyone has
> > electric
> > power and the lines are maintained by the electric company. People in

out
> > of the way places could eventually get BPL and therefore VOIP.

>
> Forget powerline. It doesn't work. (Well, it does work a little. But it is
> susceptible to interference from appliances like microwave ovens and

vacuum
> cleaners, and it interferes with everything from shortwave to emergency
> services' radio. It sure sounded like a promising technology some years
> ago, but it just doesn't work.)
>
> However, regulation in many countries requires ISPs to be service neutral.
> This is the way to go.
>

Yes, it should be neutral. If I pay for an internet connection, it
shouldn't be any concern of the provider what I transmit as long as it is
legal.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
wkearney99
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-10-2005

> I don't believe that a telephone, or the internet, is a 'basic human

right'
> that should be guaranteed to everyone by regulation and paid for by all
> users of the system.


Spoken like someone that doesn't live in an outlying area.

> There's a fundamental difference between ensuring basic food, shelted
> and access to health care and providing a telephone and/or internet
> services.


Sure, sure, and screw 'em if they want a 911 call to actually bring someone
to save them, right?

> >To blindly call it 'interference' shows a distinct lack of understanding
> >about the entire range of issues.

>
> Yes, it's a complex issue. But I haven't seen a convincing argument
> as to why the government should guarantee everyone telephone and
> internet access, and spread the costs across the entire population.


That you can't be convinced is thankfully different than how the legislators
understand the complexities.

The most basic part of the argument is making communication between all
citizens an equally accessible option. Using regulations to balance the
provisioning of this works quite well.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Rick Merrill
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-11-2005
Stephen M. Adams wrote:
...
> As I recall, in exchange for their *monopoly* the telcos agreed to wire
> everything, and were then permitted to recover the costs of wiring 'out
> of the way' places from the entire subscriber base.
>
> I don't believe that a telephone, or the internet, is a 'basic human right'
> that should be guaranteed to everyone by regulation and paid for by all
> users of the system.
>
> There's a fundamental difference between ensuring basic food, shelted
> and access to health care and providing a telephone and/or internet
> services.



Yer entitled, as they say, to your opinion, BUT in the opinion of
US courts telephone IS a basic right and cannot be removed without
"due process" - e.g. if you don't pay they cannot just pull your plug.

This is the reason that POTS bills cannot be combined with other bills,
such as cable TV, because the Cable TV CAN be terminated without due
process.
 
Reply With Quote
 
PJ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-11-2005
Hey threadstealers! Heh, I probably posted to the wrong forum. Would
anyone know of a forum that is more nitty gritty tech-oriented re:
VOIP? I'm hoping to find out about the technical ways of getting
around such blocking by the telcos. Thanks.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Miguel Cruz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-11-2005
wkearney99 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> I don't believe that a telephone, or the internet, is a 'basic human
>> right' that should be guaranteed to everyone by regulation and paid for
>> by all users of the system.

>
> Spoken like someone that doesn't live in an outlying area.


If, God forbid, I ever found myself in an "outlying area", I still wouldn't
expect that choice to be subsidized. Should everyone pay the same taxi fares
regardless of where they live?

>> There's a fundamental difference between ensuring basic food, shelted
>> and access to health care and providing a telephone and/or internet
>> services.

>
> Sure, sure, and screw 'em if they want a 911 call to actually bring someone
> to save them, right?


Cheaper to get them ham radios.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 36 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
Latest photos: Queens Day in Amsterdam; the Grand Canyon; Amman, Jordan
 
Reply With Quote
 
Miguel Cruz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-11-2005
PJ <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Hey threadstealers! Heh, I probably posted to the wrong forum. Would
> anyone know of a forum that is more nitty gritty tech-oriented re:
> VOIP? I'm hoping to find out about the technical ways of getting
> around such blocking by the telcos. Thanks.


If they overtly block apparently VoIP traffic, you just make it look like
something else. Tunnel or whatever.

If they apply some sort of degradation to all traffic other than their own
designated VoIP service, there's nothing you can do but switch ISPs (or
force them to stop by other means).

There, that's settled. Now let's get back to how everyone living alone on a
mountaintop is entitled to a subway station.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 36 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
Latest photos: Queens Day in Amsterdam; the Grand Canyon; Amman, Jordan
 
Reply With Quote
 
Rick Merrill
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-11-2005
Miguel Cruz wrote:
> PJ <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Hey threadstealers! Heh, I probably posted to the wrong forum. Would
>>anyone know of a forum that is more nitty gritty tech-oriented re:
>>VOIP? I'm hoping to find out about the technical ways of getting
>>around such blocking by the telcos. Thanks.

>
>
> If they overtly block apparently VoIP traffic, you just make it look like
> something else. Tunnel or whatever.
>
> If they apply some sort of degradation to all traffic other than their own
> designated VoIP service, there's nothing you can do but switch ISPs (or
> force them to stop by other means).
>
> There, that's settled. Now let's get back to how everyone living alone on a
> mountaintop is entitled to a subway station.
>
> miguel


That's a straw horse if I ever saw one. There is no right to a cell
phone nor to a voip phone.
 
Reply With Quote
 
John R. Levine
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-11-2005
>If, God forbid, I ever found myself in an "outlying area", I still
>wouldn't expect that choice to be subsidized. Should everyone pay the
>same taxi fares regardless of where they live?


The point behind universal service is that the more people you can
call, the more useful your phone is. Providing service to people in
the boondocks makes the phones of people in cities more valuable
because they can now call their rustic friends and relatives.

I entirely agree that the administration of USF is screwed up, and
there are a lot better ways to serve very rural areas than spending
$10K to run a pair of copper wires 50 miles across the wilderness, but
the basic network effect is sound.

R's,
John

 
Reply With Quote
 
Stephen M. Adams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-11-2005
"wkearney99" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>> I don't believe that a telephone, or the internet, is a 'basic human right'
>> that should be guaranteed to everyone by regulation and paid for by all
>> users of the system.

>
>Spoken like someone that doesn't live in an outlying area.


I did for a time. Now, I just escaped broad-band hell, after 10 years.
The brand new subdivision had no infrastructure for anything more than
POTS until about a year ago.

>> There's a fundamental difference between ensuring basic food, shelted
>> and access to health care and providing a telephone and/or internet
>> services.

>
>Sure, sure, and screw 'em if they want a 911 call to actually bring someone
>to save them, right?


And there are no other options that wireline phones, with tens if not
hundreds of thousands of dollars of cost per line, charged to ALL other
subscribers?

Is 911 access now a 'mandatory human right'?

>>>To blindly call it 'interference' shows a distinct lack of understanding
>>>about the entire range of issues.

>>
>>Yes, it's a complex issue. But I haven't seen a convincing argument
>>as to why the government should guarantee everyone telephone and
>>internet access, and spread the costs across the entire population.

>
>That you can't be convinced is thankfully different than how the legislators
>understand the complexities.


As Plato said, Democracy will turn into dictatorship, and will fail when
people realize they can vote themselves money from the treasury.

>The most basic part of the argument is making communication between all
>citizens an equally accessible option. Using regulations to balance the
>provisioning of this works quite well.


Sorry, but 'easy communication' is not a basic human right. It's a luxury.
The first amendment doesn't require the government to provide you with a
printing press....or any other means of expressing yourself.

-Stephen
--
Space Age Cybernomad Stephen Adams
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) (remove SPAM to reply)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Stephen M. Adams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-11-2005
Rick Merrill <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>Stephen M. Adams wrote:
>..
>> As I recall, in exchange for their *monopoly* the telcos agreed to wire
>> everything, and were then permitted to recover the costs of wiring 'out
>> of the way' places from the entire subscriber base.
>>
>> I don't believe that a telephone, or the internet, is a 'basic human right'
>> that should be guaranteed to everyone by regulation and paid for by all
>> users of the system.
>>
>> There's a fundamental difference between ensuring basic food, shelted
>> and access to health care and providing a telephone and/or internet
>> services.

>
>Yer entitled, as they say, to your opinion, BUT in the opinion of
>US courts telephone IS a basic right and cannot be removed without
>"due process" - e.g. if you don't pay they cannot just pull your plug.


Yeah, those "we will disconnect you if you don't pay" notices can be
safely ignored, and you can continue to use your phone forever without
paying. Not.

Even utilities like Gas and Electric can be disconnected for non-payment
during the non-winter months in Illinois, and there is no law requiring
them to be turned back on before winter starts.

>This is the reason that POTS bills cannot be combined with other bills,
>such as cable TV, because the Cable TV CAN be terminated without due
>process.


Right. I was imagining things when my ISDN bill and POTS bill came
together back in the old days. Why SBC offers combined billing for
satellite, phone and mobile.

Uh huh.

-Stephen
--
Space Age Cybernomad Stephen Adams
(E-Mail Removed) (remove SPAM to reply)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
VOiP provider search re SunRocket demise hdtv? VOIP 3 08-24-2007 02:54 PM



Advertisments