yankees invented the internet now they want to destroy it....

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by news.xtra.co.nz, Dec 1, 2005.

  1. news.xtra.co.nz, Dec 1, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. news.xtra.co.nz

    steve Guest

    news.xtra.co.nz wrote:

    > Bellsouth want to charge companies to route their data more quickly .
    > Shudder....Thin end of the wedge, people in 20 years time will be amazed
    > at the freedom we had today....
    >

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/30/AR2005113002109.html?nav=hcmodule


    TelstraClear and Telecom are already doing this here.

    If you want a free Internet, you do not use these ISPs.

    But the sheeple have no idea....and despite many trying to tell them about
    it every day, they will insist "no one told me".
     
    steve, Dec 1, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. news.xtra.co.nz

    thingy Guest

    steve wrote:
    > news.xtra.co.nz wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Bellsouth want to charge companies to route their data more quickly .
    >>Shudder....Thin end of the wedge, people in 20 years time will be amazed
    >>at the freedom we had today....
    >>

    >
    > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/30/AR2005113002109.html?nav=hcmodule
    >
    >
    > TelstraClear and Telecom are already doing this here.
    >
    > If you want a free Internet, you do not use these ISPs.
    >
    > But the sheeple have no idea....and despite many trying to tell them about
    > it every day, they will insist "no one told me".
    >
    >


    Th crazy thing is there is a huge amount of fibre laid and not used, so
    they want to put in technology to prioritise packets whn there is no
    need...This intelligence also costs and while some packets get that
    priority, the overall average result is slower because of the huge
    engines needed to do this and the time it takes them, so it costs a lot
    and hinders performance a lot. The sensible way is to liven up unused
    fibre, and make the big pipes bigger, cheap and very effective...but
    that gets them no extra $. So we will loose what we have now, (
    Intelligent either end dumb in the middle).....all for monopolists to
    make more $. If this does not show up how not to let business do
    business I dont now what will...

    regards

    Thing
    PS Google is apparantly buying fibre, guess they can see this coming,
    the lobbyists will spend millions in bribes to get what they want....so
    google plans to go around them....using the huge pipe low cost
    approach....it will succeed....
     
    thingy, Dec 1, 2005
    #3
  4. news.xtra.co.nz

    Kent Smith Guest

    "thingy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > steve wrote:
    >> news.xtra.co.nz wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Bellsouth want to charge companies to route their data more quickly .
    >>>Shudder....Thin end of the wedge, people in 20 years time will be amazed
    >>>at the freedom we had today....
    >>>

    >>
    >> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/30/AR2005113002109.html?nav=hcmodule
    >>
    >>
    >> TelstraClear and Telecom are already doing this here. If you want a free
    >> Internet, you do not use these ISPs.
    >>
    >> But the sheeple have no idea....and despite many trying to tell them
    >> about
    >> it every day, they will insist "no one told me".

    >
    > Th crazy thing is there is a huge amount of fibre laid and not used, so
    > they want to put in technology to prioritise packets whn there is no
    > need...This intelligence also costs and while some packets get that
    > priority, the overall average result is slower because of the huge engines
    > needed to do this and the time it takes them, so it costs a lot and
    > hinders performance a lot. The sensible way is to liven up unused fibre,
    > and make the big pipes bigger, cheap and very effective...but that gets
    > them no extra $. So we will loose what we have now, ( Intelligent either
    > end dumb in the middle).....all for monopolists to make more $. If this
    > does not show up how not to let business do business I dont now what
    > will...
    >

    Prioritisation and throttling of data has been around since routers first
    routed. The article however, refers to intro-packet prioritisation i.e http
    packets are analysed and then prioritised based on their contents. This has
    also been around for a long time (in fact firewalls do this), and there are
    obviously some smaller companies already doing it but it's when a major
    telco tries it on public domain Internet traffic, when it becomes a bit of a
    worry.


    -KENT
     
    Kent Smith, Dec 1, 2005
    #4
  5. news.xtra.co.nz

    Shane Guest

    On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 10:41:53 +1300, Kent Smith wrote:

    >
    > "thingy" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> steve wrote:
    >>> news.xtra.co.nz wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Bellsouth want to charge companies to route their data more quickly .
    >>>>Shudder....Thin end of the wedge, people in 20 years time will be amazed
    >>>>at the freedom we had today....
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/30/AR2005113002109.html?nav=hcmodule
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> TelstraClear and Telecom are already doing this here. If you want a free
    >>> Internet, you do not use these ISPs.
    >>>
    >>> But the sheeple have no idea....and despite many trying to tell them
    >>> about
    >>> it every day, they will insist "no one told me".

    >>
    >> Th crazy thing is there is a huge amount of fibre laid and not used, so
    >> they want to put in technology to prioritise packets whn there is no
    >> need...This intelligence also costs and while some packets get that
    >> priority, the overall average result is slower because of the huge engines
    >> needed to do this and the time it takes them, so it costs a lot and
    >> hinders performance a lot. The sensible way is to liven up unused fibre,
    >> and make the big pipes bigger, cheap and very effective...but that gets
    >> them no extra $. So we will loose what we have now, ( Intelligent either
    >> end dumb in the middle).....all for monopolists to make more $. If this
    >> does not show up how not to let business do business I dont now what
    >> will...
    >>

    > Prioritisation and throttling of data has been around since routers first
    > routed. The article however, refers to intro-packet prioritisation i.e http
    > packets are analysed and then prioritised based on their contents. This has
    > also been around for a long time (in fact firewalls do this), and there are
    > obviously some smaller companies already doing it but it's when a major
    > telco tries it on public domain Internet traffic, when it becomes a bit of a
    > worry.
    >
    >
    > -KENT


    I dont think the telcos have thought this through, if they are going to
    start inspecting packets (for prioritisation) they are risking their
    common carrier status
    (Something that has saved thier asses several times over)


    --
    Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked

    The best way to get the right answer on usenet is to post the wrong one.
     
    Shane, Dec 1, 2005
    #5
  6. "Shane" <-a-geek.net> wrote in message
    news:p-a-geek.net...
    > On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 10:41:53 +1300, Kent Smith wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> "thingy" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> steve wrote:
    >>>> news.xtra.co.nz wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Bellsouth want to charge companies to route their data more quickly .
    >>>>>Shudder....Thin end of the wedge, people in 20 years time will be
    >>>>>amazed
    >>>>>at the freedom we had today....
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/30/AR2005113002109.html?nav=hcmodule
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> TelstraClear and Telecom are already doing this here. If you want a
    >>>> free
    >>>> Internet, you do not use these ISPs.
    >>>>
    >>>> But the sheeple have no idea....and despite many trying to tell them
    >>>> about
    >>>> it every day, they will insist "no one told me".
    >>>
    >>> Th crazy thing is there is a huge amount of fibre laid and not used, so
    >>> they want to put in technology to prioritise packets whn there is no
    >>> need...This intelligence also costs and while some packets get that
    >>> priority, the overall average result is slower because of the huge
    >>> engines
    >>> needed to do this and the time it takes them, so it costs a lot and
    >>> hinders performance a lot. The sensible way is to liven up unused fibre,
    >>> and make the big pipes bigger, cheap and very effective...but that gets
    >>> them no extra $. So we will loose what we have now, ( Intelligent either
    >>> end dumb in the middle).....all for monopolists to make more $. If this
    >>> does not show up how not to let business do business I dont now what
    >>> will...
    >>>

    >> Prioritisation and throttling of data has been around since routers first
    >> routed. The article however, refers to intro-packet prioritisation i.e
    >> http
    >> packets are analysed and then prioritised based on their contents. This
    >> has
    >> also been around for a long time (in fact firewalls do this), and there
    >> are
    >> obviously some smaller companies already doing it but it's when a major
    >> telco tries it on public domain Internet traffic, when it becomes a bit
    >> of a
    >> worry.
    >>
    >>
    >> -KENT

    >
    > I dont think the telcos have thought this through, if they are going to
    > start inspecting packets (for prioritisation) they are risking their
    > common carrier status
    > (Something that has saved thier asses several times over)
    >
    >
    > --
    > Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked
    >
    > The best way to get the right answer on usenet is to post the wrong one.
    >


    good point - imagine if the telcos are seeing kiddy porn and doing nothing
    about it.
     
    news.xtra.co.nz, Dec 2, 2005
    #6
  7. On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 14:39:06 +1300, someone purporting to be
    news.xtra.co.nz didst scrawl:

    >
    > "Shane" <-a-geek.net> wrote in message
    > news:p-a-geek.net...

    *SNIP*
    >> I dont think the telcos have thought this through, if they are going to
    >> start inspecting packets (for prioritisation) they are risking their
    >> common carrier status
    >> (Something that has saved thier asses several times over)
    >>

    > good point - imagine if the telcos are seeing kiddy porn and doing nothing
    > about it.


    Not just kiddy porn. The feebs could start demanding that all e-mail
    traffic be inspected to ensure that there are no breaches of CAN-SPAM. Or
    extend Carnivore to the ISP level and have traffic streams sniffed for
    particular words or phrases, and it would be very difficult (impossible)
    for the ISPs to claim that they can't do that.

    It's a bad move on so many levels. The idea must be a marketroid's, with
    no (or ignored) input from legal. If it went through legal with no
    negative comments, that's a lawyer or team of them that should be sued for
    malpractice.

    --
    Matthew Poole
    "Don't use force. Get a bigger hammer."
     
    Matthew Poole, Dec 2, 2005
    #7
  8. news.xtra.co.nz

    thing2 Guest

    Kent Smith wrote:
    > "thingy" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >>steve wrote:
    >>
    >>>news.xtra.co.nz wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Bellsouth want to charge companies to route their data more quickly .
    >>>>Shudder....Thin end of the wedge, people in 20 years time will be amazed
    >>>>at the freedom we had today....
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/30/AR2005113002109.html?nav=hcmodule
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>TelstraClear and Telecom are already doing this here. If you want a free
    >>>Internet, you do not use these ISPs.
    >>>
    >>>But the sheeple have no idea....and despite many trying to tell them
    >>>about
    >>>it every day, they will insist "no one told me".

    >>
    >>Th crazy thing is there is a huge amount of fibre laid and not used, so
    >>they want to put in technology to prioritise packets whn there is no
    >>need...This intelligence also costs and while some packets get that
    >>priority, the overall average result is slower because of the huge engines
    >>needed to do this and the time it takes them, so it costs a lot and
    >>hinders performance a lot. The sensible way is to liven up unused fibre,
    >>and make the big pipes bigger, cheap and very effective...but that gets
    >>them no extra $. So we will loose what we have now, ( Intelligent either
    >>end dumb in the middle).....all for monopolists to make more $. If this
    >>does not show up how not to let business do business I dont now what
    >>will...
    >>

    >
    > Prioritisation and throttling of data has been around since routers first
    > routed. The article however, refers to intro-packet prioritisation i.e http
    > packets are analysed and then prioritised based on their contents. This has
    > also been around for a long time (in fact firewalls do this), and there are
    > obviously some smaller companies already doing it but it's when a major
    > telco tries it on public domain Internet traffic, when it becomes a bit of a
    > worry.
    >
    >
    > -KENT
    >
    >


    Stubs, yes, hence my intelligence at the edges comment. Here yes, we are
    starting to talk major backbone, all these should be doing is policy
    routeing as fast as possible....hence my post...

    When they say makes high priority faster it is only a partial truth, the
    rest really suffer, and if you are going to spend this much $ on engines
    that do this then a better technical result is to just use more
    pipes......so it is an obvious ripoff....

    regards

    thing
     
    thing2, Dec 2, 2005
    #8
  9. news.xtra.co.nz

    thing2 Guest

    Matthew Poole wrote:
    > On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 14:39:06 +1300, someone purporting to be
    > news.xtra.co.nz didst scrawl:
    >
    >
    >>"Shane" <-a-geek.net> wrote in message
    >>news:p-a-geek.net...

    >
    > *SNIP*
    >
    >>>I dont think the telcos have thought this through, if they are going to
    >>>start inspecting packets (for prioritisation) they are risking their
    >>>common carrier status
    >>>(Something that has saved thier asses several times over)
    >>>

    >>
    >>good point - imagine if the telcos are seeing kiddy porn and doing nothing
    >>about it.

    >
    >
    > Not just kiddy porn. The feebs could start demanding that all e-mail
    > traffic be inspected to ensure that there are no breaches of CAN-SPAM. Or
    > extend Carnivore to the ISP level and have traffic streams sniffed for
    > particular words or phrases, and it would be very difficult (impossible)
    > for the ISPs to claim that they can't do that.
    >
    > It's a bad move on so many levels. The idea must be a marketroid's, with
    > no (or ignored) input from legal. If it went through legal with no
    > negative comments, that's a lawyer or team of them that should be sued for
    > malpractice.
    >



    sounds like the Sony debackle in the making yet again, greed has over
    ridden common sense...........

    I also have to wonder what the effect is globally on this, the world's
    Internet does not end in the USA (well OK it just about does in terms of
    traffic volume) but it does not have to stay taht way and the growing
    third world wont need to route via the USA....I mean if your Korean, you
    look by and large at korean webs sites, so who cares?

    regards

    Thing
     
    thing2, Dec 2, 2005
    #9
  10. news.xtra.co.nz

    Gordon Guest

    On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 10:41:53 +1300, Kent Smith wrote:

    > Prioritisation and throttling of data has been around since routers first
    > routed. The article however, refers to intro-packet prioritisation i.e http
    > packets are analysed and then prioritised based on their contents. This has
    > also been around for a long time (in fact firewalls do this), and there are
    > obviously some smaller companies already doing it but it's when a major
    > telco tries it on public domain Internet traffic, when it becomes a bit of a
    > worry.


    Censorship?
     
    Gordon, Dec 3, 2005
    #10
  11. In article <>, thing2 <> wrote:
    (snip)
    >
    >sounds like the Sony debackle in the making yet again, greed has over
    >ridden common sense...........


    ... and yet, this appears to surprise you ? :) :)

    Bruce

    ----------------------------------------
    I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are the good
    people and the bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and
    only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides.

    Lord Vetinari in Guards ! Guards ! - Terry Pratchett

    Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups
    (if there were any)
     
    Bruce Sinclair, Dec 5, 2005
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. PC LOAD LETTER

    OT: I invented the InterNeil

    PC LOAD LETTER, Jan 9, 2006, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    102
    Views:
    2,081
  2. Boomer
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    891
    William Poaster
    Jan 30, 2004
  3. Doug MacLean
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    981
    Doug MacLean
    Dec 11, 2007
  4. richard

    Those damn yankees!

    richard, Oct 10, 2009, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    368
    RickMerrill
    Oct 10, 2009
  5. richard

    Yankees sox game ends in a wild scene

    richard, Sep 27, 2010, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    407
    chuckcar
    Sep 27, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page