Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Morning Legal Briefs

View
11 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >

11. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Dec 2, 2010, 09:52 InBlack
 
Wallshadows wrote on Dec 1, 2010, 12:50:
I'm honestly surprised Julian Assange has not run into any 'unfortunate' events.

The sad thing is is that the information he is releasing is what we should expect news agencies to uncover without having Interpol up their ass or threatened with the 'Espionage Act'.

Unfortunately, it's better to report news about Miley Cirus and talking about Twitter it would seem.

Thats not how "they" work anymore. We live in an age where (dis)information is the best weapon, and discrediting someone works much better than making him a martyr and risking discovery along the way...
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Dec 2, 2010, 04:02 Prez
 
I've been on the fence over this issue for a while, as both sides have an argument. But I've decided that when in doubt, I'll opt for the side that doesn't include the Federal Government grabbing yet more control is does not have the right to. So, for the record, I'm against net neutrality.

Is the current situation ideal? Hell no - I have Comcast (due to lack of choices in my area), so I know first-hand how shadily they do business. But there has to be a better solution than turning the reigns over to such a historically out-of-control, corrupt, and incompetent entity as the Fed. It will only make the problem worse in my opinion.

This comment was edited on Dec 2, 2010, 04:46.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Dec 1, 2010, 17:37 avianflu
 
good comment Verno -- worth the read. The underlying issue is that Cable Co's are losing subscribers for at least 2 years now, and for the first time since the arrival of Cable TV in the USA. Hence, the desire to seek other sources of revenue.

There is a ton of investor pressure on NetFlix too and no one in the media wants to talk about that. We'll be seeing ads on Netflix and monthly subscription prices will increase. Sad about that.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Dec 1, 2010, 16:38 Cutter
 
Verno you're banging your head against a wall here trying to explain this to him. Who wants to bet the consumer will win here, or who wants to bet the consumer will get screwed - as per usual - here?
 
Avatar 25394
 
"The South will boogie again!" - Disco Stu
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Dec 1, 2010, 15:59 PHJF
 

If you want to actually educate yourself on the topic instead of making loaded statements about the government then read up on NANOG about it, it's a very complex situation.

Does he ever do anything else?

Anyways, I clicked the WikiLeaks link only to see he's wanted, lol, for "sex crimes". Assuming he is innocent of his, ahem, supposed crimes... that's one helluvan ad hominem.
 
Avatar 17251
 
Steam + PSN: PHJF
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Dec 1, 2010, 15:43 Verno
 
See the double-think here? I do. Nevertheless I think I see what you are trying to say about Level3.

No you don't judging by the bizarre rant and the oddball accusations you leveled. I'm not saying anything about Level3, I just summarized a situation where the government is needed. This is a situation where government assistance could be eventually be required because this is a sponsored monopoly that isn't acting in the best interests of it's customers who are the ones behind the situation itself in the first place. You can get all dramatic with talk of spying and whatnot but most "net neutrality" situations are a result of business interests not being able to conduct themselves properly and eventually harming the individual.

The bottom line is that customers want Netflix, Comcast wants people to pay more money for Netflix because it didn't have the foresight to make a backhaul agreement with Netflix and Comcast itself is a sponsored monopoly in many markets. It's a complicated situation that involves both business and consumer interests and groups. It can't be summed up in silly soundbites about the federal government, black helicopters and blah blah blah.

I personally haven't even fully formed an opinion on it so I have no clue where you pull those inferences from either. I'm leaning towards Comcast being the "bad guy" here if you really need to break it down into simple terms. They are upset about increased traffic that originates from their own userbase so they want more money from an interconnection peer despite already increasing residential bills just yesterday. So they are claiming they need more money to meet costs that they already passed off to the consumer which is pretty much the definition of having your cake and eating it too. As I said however it's not really a situation that is simple in the first place as no one knows what the backhaul arrangements were prior to that.

This comment was edited on Dec 1, 2010, 15:54.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: The Last of Us Remastered
Watching: Intruders, Coherence, The Rover
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
5. Re: Net neutrality rules: coming December 21. Dec 1, 2010, 15:34 LittleMe
 
Verno wrote on Dec 1, 2010, 14:08:
Comcast is a (GOVERNMENT) licensed monopoly in many markets.

....

This is called competition and free market, something that you claim to support.

See the double-think here in your logic? I do. Nevertheless I think I see what you are trying to say about Level3.

You are saying that we need to regulate the entire national Internet, every router that has public data transiting it, here in the country because the government has fucked up the market by creating a duopoly and destroyed consumer choice. The example you cite is that Level3 routes Netflix traffic to Comcast too much through their new peering instead of an old route.

It looks to me like you want to play nanny-state with Internet providers who don't route traffic according to your holier than thou principles and you want to hand lots of authority over to the Federal Government, who continue to illegally spy on our communications, to handle it, as if they can do all that much. You'd much rather Comcast continue to have a monopoly than to end their government granted stranglehold on the market.

That's how it looks to me.

This comment was edited on Dec 1, 2010, 15:42.
 
Avatar 23321
 
Political freedom can only be preceded by economic freedom which is preceded by monetary freedom.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4. Re: Net neutrality rules: coming December 21. Dec 1, 2010, 14:08 Verno
 
LittleMe wrote on Dec 1, 2010, 11:11:
That last comment refers to the brouhaha over Comcast's demand for cash to deliver cached Netflix traffic to its subscribers,

That's absolutely terrible that Comcast wants to charge for a value added service! You bastards! Call in the Feds, hurry!! The sky is falling down!


You clearly don't grasp the situation, it's quite complicated and this is exactly the situation where you need government intervention because Comcast is a licensed monopoly in many markets. It has little to do with end of mile traffic, it's mostly about the backhaul agreements and negotiated peering contracts. This isn't exactly the first time Comcast has tried something like this too.

If you want to actually educate yourself on the topic instead of making loaded statements about the government then read up on NANOG about it, it's a very complex situation. I will try to sum it up for you:

Comcast is paying Level3 for transit and/or peering.

Level3 takes away business from another CDN provider Comcast already does business with. This is called competition and free market, something that you claim to support. Note that they didn't take away business from Comcast itself.

This flips more traffic to Level3, increasing Comcast's commitment and traffic with Level3.

Comcast gets mad and wants more money as a result of this and declining cable subcriptions(they lost something like 250k last quarter).

Please note that the actual end of mile usage is being driven by Comcast subscribers who want Netflix, Level3 isn't forcing Netflix traffic on anyone.

This comment was edited on Dec 1, 2010, 14:18.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: The Last of Us Remastered
Watching: Intruders, Coherence, The Rover
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Dec 1, 2010, 13:22 LittleMe
 
Well said. Here in the US, apparently they do answer to the laws of the land. This is a recent development. If they knock on your door, treat it as a life threatening situation.

This comment was edited on Dec 1, 2010, 13:29.
 
Avatar 23321
 
Political freedom can only be preceded by economic freedom which is preceded by monetary freedom.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
2. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Dec 1, 2010, 12:50 Wallshadows
 
I'm honestly surprised Julian Assange has not run into any 'unfortunate' events.

The sad thing is is that the information he is releasing is what we should expect news agencies to uncover without having Interpol up their ass or threatened with the 'Espionage Act'.

Unfortunately, it's better to report news about Miley Cirus and talking about Twitter it would seem.
 
Avatar 50040
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
1. Net neutrality rules: coming December 21. Dec 1, 2010, 11:11 LittleMe
 
That last comment refers to the brouhaha over Comcast's demand for cash to deliver cached Netflix traffic to its subscribers,

That's absolutely terrible that Comcast wants to charge for a value added service! You bastards! Call in the Feds, hurry!! The sky is falling down!

 
Avatar 23321
 
Political freedom can only be preceded by economic freedom which is preceded by monetary freedom.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo