Difference between revisions of "Talk:Thoughts on combating packet discrimination"
From Organic Design wiki
Infomaniac (talk | contribs) (Created page with 'Team: this is a rough draft. I'm not familliar enough with the category ontology on the site to appropriately categorize. Please categorize as you see fit. --~~~~') |
Infomaniac (talk | contribs) (encrypted email - Pretty Good Idea) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Team: this is a rough draft. I'm not familliar enough with the category ontology on the site to appropriately categorize. Please categorize as you see fit. --[[User:Infomaniac|Infomaniac]] 04:29, 13 August 2010 (NZST) | Team: this is a rough draft. I'm not familliar enough with the category ontology on the site to appropriately categorize. Please categorize as you see fit. --[[User:Infomaniac|Infomaniac]] 04:29, 13 August 2010 (NZST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Fact check: deep packet inspection and p2p blocking== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2010/08/a-paper-trail-of-betrayal-googles-net-neutrality-collapse.ars | ||
| + | : More importantly, wireless broadband access providers do not acknowledge the wireless industry's record of dubious practices—a list that continues to grow. For example, the cable industry notes that "providers of wireless Internet access unabashedly engage in outright blocking." Deep packet inspection "has been deployed far and wide" by various wireless last mile network operators. Further, the contractual terms imposed by major wireless carriers purport to prohibit the use of peer-to-peer applications, Web broadcasts, server or host applications, tethering, and the use of wireless as a substitute for wired broadband. Nonetheless, wireless network operators' practices are not transparent, the government to date has declined to exercise its rightful oversight authority, and effective enforcement mechanisms to address abuses do not exist. | ||
| + | |||
| + | : Wireless Internet companies "in particular fail" to honor the philosophy inherent in the FCC's proposed nondiscrimination rule, the firm charged. | ||
| + | ::Unfortunately our categorisation on this site is not very structured, we've been trying to get the site "under control" for the last few years but there are a lot of messed up cats and orphans around! I was about to send you via email our PGP public keys but then realised you have a gmail address which kind of renders PGP pointless - I can set up an email account for you on our server if you like, either under our domain or one of your own if you point an MX record at our IP. --[[User:Nad|nad]] 09:04, 13 August 2010 (NZST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Yeah, that would be nice. I am about ready to pull my foot out of the mouth of [[The Beast]] --[[User:Infomaniac|Infomaniac]] 10:04, 13 August 2010 (NZST) | ||
Latest revision as of 22:04, 12 August 2010
Team: this is a rough draft. I'm not familliar enough with the category ontology on the site to appropriately categorize. Please categorize as you see fit. --Infomaniac 04:29, 13 August 2010 (NZST)
Fact check: deep packet inspection and p2p blocking
- More importantly, wireless broadband access providers do not acknowledge the wireless industry's record of dubious practices—a list that continues to grow. For example, the cable industry notes that "providers of wireless Internet access unabashedly engage in outright blocking." Deep packet inspection "has been deployed far and wide" by various wireless last mile network operators. Further, the contractual terms imposed by major wireless carriers purport to prohibit the use of peer-to-peer applications, Web broadcasts, server or host applications, tethering, and the use of wireless as a substitute for wired broadband. Nonetheless, wireless network operators' practices are not transparent, the government to date has declined to exercise its rightful oversight authority, and effective enforcement mechanisms to address abuses do not exist.
- Wireless Internet companies "in particular fail" to honor the philosophy inherent in the FCC's proposed nondiscrimination rule, the firm charged.
- Unfortunately our categorisation on this site is not very structured, we've been trying to get the site "under control" for the last few years but there are a lot of messed up cats and orphans around! I was about to send you via email our PGP public keys but then realised you have a gmail address which kind of renders PGP pointless - I can set up an email account for you on our server if you like, either under our domain or one of your own if you point an MX record at our IP. --nad 09:04, 13 August 2010 (NZST)
Yeah, that would be nice. I am about ready to pull my foot out of the mouth of The Beast --Infomaniac 10:04, 13 August 2010 (NZST)
