IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New I get my email from my web host, not my ISP
Information services that are transmitted over the internet require that I have an internet connection. They don't require that I have a particular internet connection. Cox is arguing that they do.

I know you work in email, and email represents a large portion of total internet traffic. (Less by the day, with the advent of streaming video.) But how much of that email is ISP email?

In a totally unscientific survey, I've got over 8,400 names on my mailing lists. Gmail, Yahoo and Hotmail account for more than 4,900 of them. So your earlier "threat" to delete mail after three days? Would affect less than half my readers.

If anyone actually tried it, a whole lot more people would decouple their email addresses from their ISPs. And once that lock-in is gone, what's to keep them from switching to a new provider? That's the only reason ISPs provide email any more.
--

Drew
New Ditto. We've never checked our e-mail on our Cox account.
New whoosh, point=missed
disconnect your cable modem, then try to get your google yahoo or aol mail. Still think they are decoupled? Hardly. Without a transport layer 1-3 you cant get layers 4-7 very successfully. You can get the first 3 layers from telcos cable companies wifimax as well as SAT mixed with a pots and 56k modem.

Net neutrality means you cant get thru to 911 via your voip phone because the neighbor is downloading GBs of porn and the QOS for voip cant be used by law. Your loss.
New Is that what it means? Really?
Cox is saying that their broadband and their email are a single product. Can't have just broadband, because they don't sell it that way.

Do you agree with that position? Is it true that it's not possible to offer broadband service that doesn't do anything except connect to the internet at a given rate?

And what about the other example? What if Time Warner decides to block all traffic from NetFlix. And Comcast decides to block everything from Hulu. (For "block" you can assume I mean, "slow it down so much the service is unusable".) Should that be allowed? Do you think market forces alone are sufficient to prevent it? (Hint: It's already happened.) If it is a problem, what should be done about it?

As for 911 service, is it impossible that there could be an exception made? Or might it be time to recognize that a whole lot of people aren't using the POTS any more, and we should reexamine how 911 is accomplished, rather than just pass laws protecting the POTS?
--

Drew
New Specious argument.
Without electricity your cable modem won't work, therefore the power company should have a say on traffic through the modem?

It doesn't work that way.

Net neutrality means that the pipe owners can't discriminate against those companies that don't pay for preferential treatment.

http://www.startribu...iD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUsZ

Cheers,
Scott.
New so downloading porn == telephone service. okay
New QOS is NOT the issue here.
QOS has been defined for a long time and it is understood and VOIP has to be guaranteed and honored if it Sets the QOS flag.

TOR, Bit-torrent and other things don't set the QOS flag.

You are comparing service flags vs content. Not entirely correct at all.
New bullshit greg, you know better
content is just thst. Everyone else is claiming all services are equal, that is their argument. If it isnt then you have government dictating what service is worth a higher QOS instead of the network operators. You sure that is where you want to go?
Think pinkon and moveorg are declared protected content as opposed to webmd and mikevitale.com. Thats what they envision for the airwaves why wouldnt they extend it to the net. By the way wikileaks would be relagated to a maybe status
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
     its acorns fault - (boxley) - (51)
         Let's see if I follow this - (drook) - (50)
             you got it :-) - (boxley)
             Not necessarily - (beepster) - (48)
                 I don't see it - (drook) - (43)
                     Where you stand depends on where you sit - (crazy) - (40)
                         who is paying the bill? - (boxley) - (39)
                             Doesn't Net Neutrality help customers? - (drook) - (38)
                                 or... - (folkert) - (37)
                                     it isnt, and they would lose you as a customer to a telco - (boxley) - (36)
                                         Why would the other be any better? - (drook) - (35)
                                             why do you think that is the plan? - (boxley) - (34)
                                                 NAF's comments. - (Another Scott) - (33)
                                                     correct - (boxley) - (8)
                                                         I get my email from my web host, not my ISP - (drook) - (7)
                                                             Ditto. We've never checked our e-mail on our Cox account. -NT - (Another Scott)
                                                             whoosh, point=missed - (boxley) - (5)
                                                                 Is that what it means? Really? - (drook)
                                                                 Specious argument. - (Another Scott) - (1)
                                                                     so downloading porn == telephone service. okay -NT - (boxley)
                                                                 QOS is NOT the issue here. - (folkert) - (1)
                                                                     bullshit greg, you know better - (boxley)
                                                     Oh, cool, code words... - (beepster) - (23)
                                                         It *is* telecom - (drook) - (22)
                                                             Doesn't mean... - (beepster) - (21)
                                                                 You don't like the USF. Now tell me why it's not a telecom. -NT - (drook) - (20)
                                                                     doesnt use the AIN so its not a telecom, no a-links needed - (boxley) - (4)
                                                                         Verizon says you're wrong - (drook) - (3)
                                                                             federal court said you are wrong, they should know - (boxley) - (2)
                                                                                 Have you read Brand X? - (drook) - (1)
                                                                                     hafta take this offline if you are really interested -NT - (boxley)
                                                                     I didn't say it wasn't telecom - (beepster) - (14)
                                                                         Sure, it's all about TAXes. As always. Sure... :-/ -NT - (Another Scott) - (13)
                                                                             Is that NOT what you think - (beepster) - (12)
                                                                                 Let's see. - (Another Scott) - (11)
                                                                                     Re: Let's see. - (boxley) - (4)
                                                                                         ... -NT - (Another Scott)
                                                                                         So you're in favour of letting people starve to death? - (CRConrad) - (2)
                                                                                             point=missed - (boxley)
                                                                                             Considering that you are {unnaturally!} oft better-informed - (Ashton)
                                                                                     Let's see, part B - (drook)
                                                                                     So who will pay - (beepster) - (4)
                                                                                         you already did, part of the stimulus package -NT - (boxley) - (3)
                                                                                             But I also pay - (beepster) - (2)
                                                                                                 Poor beepster ... could your taxes be so onerous - (Ashton) - (1)
                                                                                                     bwah ha ha - (beepster)
                     Given rulings on fair use and other new technologies - (beepster) - (1)
                         We already know what the Telcos et al want to do - (drook)
                 Any law at all == totalitarianism - (mhuber) - (3)
                     ;^> ... [© CRC. He says.] -NT - (Ashton) - (2)
                         Bet I got it from someone. I only introduced it to IWT. ^_^ -NT - (CRConrad) - (1)
                             Nice to see you stop by again. - (folkert)

Put *that* in your pipe and smoke it!
222 ms