The facts on SOPA
#61
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #61
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
what are your feelings about going after the ISP's? in the current SOPA act, they are being allowed, in my mind an extra-ordinary amount of grace as far as their due-diligence responsiblity regarding copyright law. It is indeed one thing to require court ordered blocks to pirate sites, but if the ISP gets a forever pass and slap on the wrist, while still benefitting from the volume revenue, I would say they should be culpable for that illicit traffic to a far greater degree than the current iteration of the bill.....
Soo.... i'm confused...
Is your stance that the Bill goes TOO far, or NOT far enough?

I see the ISP issue from two angles;
1) they are a utility, like the energy company supplying electricity to my home. They aren't culpable for supplying electricity to my neighbor who has an indoor ganja grow room.. (and no, for the NSA person who is eavesdropping, that was just a made up example.. i have no idea what goes on in my neighbors' home)

and a second --possibly conflicting view:
2) If they are knowingly contributing to crime(s) and/or are even helping encourage such [which i do believe they do/have] , then they should definately be corrected by the proper action.
If there's stats on how much traffic goes to illegal sites, then how on earth could they possibly say they have no direct knowledge of these crimes... isn't that the definition of "willful blindness" ?
#62
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #62
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
No need for it to be. Bit Torrent is just a protocol - like FTP. It's not an organized network like Limewire.



Exactly. And the few trackers that do not deal in illegal content would be left alone.



Well, no, not really. Downloaders should be subject to sanctions such as losing their private internet access but serious criminal penalties? No. It would create a logjam in the courts and be unworkable i various other ways. And morally it's the equivalent of sending a kid to the pen for shoplifting candy. A trip downtown and community service is enough.

Uploaders and site owners are a different story because they actually engage in wholesale distribution of stolen IP.
I fundamentally disagree here John- the end user gets the advantage of illegal softwares "competitive" pricing- RIAA seemed to think so as well- and actually Juries agreed with them on the music download side- I think if we start talking about Pirate software, which is used in many case not as entertainment, but tools to derive income the issue grows even more absurd.

If it is theft, it is theft- Would someone stealing CD's from a shop be seen as anything but? or a copy of Microsoft Office, or ProTools from a shop?

stealing ProTools or Nuendo is nearly grand theft actually. so I am really having difficulty with this bizarre notion of end user forgiveness when its the end user who is ripping off the copyright holder.
#63
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #63
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
Soo.... i'm confused...
Is your stance that the Bill goes TOO far, or NOT far enough?

I see the ISP issue from two angles;
1) they are a utility, like the energy company supplying electricity to my home. They aren't culpable for supplying electricity to my neighbor who has an indoor ganja grow room.. (and no, for the NSA person who is eavesdropping, that was just a made up example.. i have no idea what goes on in my neighbors' home)

and a second --possibly conflicting view:
2) If they are knowingly contributing to crime(s) and/or are even helping encourage such [which i do believe they do/have] , then they should definately be corrected by the proper action.
If there's stats on how much traffic goes to illegal sites, then how on earth could they possibly say they have no direct knowledge of these crimes... isn't that the definition of "willful blindness" ?
so your point is? perhaps that the ISP is party to the crime?
#64
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #64
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rust Creep View Post
Great.. more laws that under the guise of "for the public" that will ultimately strip americans of further freedoms... arent there laws and means of dealing with piracy already?

Sent from my DROIDX using Gearslutz.com
Domestic Piracy, yes. (ie, if the owner and/or server is a US citizen or on US soil, then yes.. they can take those down, and the couple that were based here were taken down.)

>> The problem though.. is that most pirate sites that serve the US (and world) are located/owned in foreign countries. They don't respond to takedowns, as there's no such law in those countries...[We can only write US law.. not world law...]

This Bill would block US credit payments to and the Domain of-- sites dedicated to infringment (and there's a VERY specific set of conditions that must be met for this to happen, and only can happen after all the other measures in the Bill are exhausted...)
John Eppstein
Thread Starter
#65
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #65
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Allison View Post
Either give this one teeth, or don't bother passing it.
What "teeth" would you suggest?

What could we do that would be effective against offshore sites?

Just throwing up our hands and saying "Oh well, it's not 100% so there's no point" is defeatist and obstructionist. Some action is better than nothing. And seriously, based on my knowledge of the mentality of the vast majority of people who pirate music today, I think it would make a pretty big dent, if for no other reason by eliminating the ability to search for specific pirated content via popular search engines.

Just the impact of disabling the ability to google for torrents would be huge.
#66
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #66
Lives for gear
 
initialsBB's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
AT&T here in the US recently unilaterally terminated all unlimited service and moved all customers to metered usage. No warning, no recourse, even for those with long standing accounts. For some time previous they had been capping data rates at below the contracted for rate, too. They used the change as a tool for shifting customers over to their new fiber based "Uverse" system which features a somewhat larger data cap, higher speed, and most notably, AT&T's own content delivery system for the more "advanced" packages.
yep, it's the end of net neutrality. usage of their fiber optic tv service is unlimited, but streaming of netflix or hulu isn't. if people continue to think that caps are no big deal it will be the end of the internet as we know it.
#67
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #67
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
so your point is? perhaps that the ISP is party to the crime?
Perhaps yes.
Personally i don't think they should get a free pass on this issue. At the same time, i don't think they should carry the full burden. Unfortunately, written into the DMCA was basically a license to kill. This needs to change.
#68
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #68
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
No need for it to be. Bit Torrent is just a protocol - like FTP. It's not an organized network like Limewire.



Exactly. And the few trackers that do not deal in illegal content would be left alone.



Well, no, not really. Downloaders should be subject to sanctions such as losing their private internet access but serious criminal penalties? No. It would create a logjam in the courts and be unworkable i various other ways. And morally it's the equivalent of sending a kid to the pen for shoplifting candy. A trip downtown and community service is enough.

Uploaders and site owners are a different story because they actually engage in wholesale distribution of stolen IP.
I fundamentally disagree here John- the end user gets the advantage of illegal softwares "competitive" pricing- RIAA seemed to think so as well- and actually Juries agreed with them on the music download side- I think if we start talking about Pirate software, which is used in many case not as entertainment, but tools to derive income the issue grows even more absurd.

If it is theft, it is theft- Would someone stealing CD's from a shop be seen as anything but? or a copy of Microsoft Office, or ProTools from a shop?

stealing ProTools or Nuendo is nearly grand theft actually. so I am really having difficulty with this bizarre notion of end user forgiveness when its the end user who is ripping off the copyright holder.

oh and that doesnt mean the site holders shouldn't be punished either, but without an international copyright protection agreement- (which actually already exist) the continuing game of whack-a-mole would continue....

I might add- the Patriot Act has provisions for direct action against criminal violators as well if diplomatic solutions unsatisfactory., And as I pointed out IT HAS BEEN USED IN COPYRIGHT VIOLATION CASES ALREADY.
#69
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #69
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
BitTorrent is second at 16.5 percent, according to stats collected in September.

so we know who and where the pirate downloaders might be..... interesting.....

funny that Bit Torrent isnt mentioned in SOPA......
If Bit Torrent is the second highest bandwidth user... and that's just ONE (possibly not even the biggest anymore...) method [what was the stat.. 98.7% of BitTorrent was infringment..], you can imagine that piracy is actually one of---Probably THE biggest use of traffic on any ISP's network..

There's a surefire disincentive for them to lift a finger, as their bread-n-butter is pirate traffic.. especially the more they move to usage models.
Thus, they need government regulations/rules to act, or they will continue to "look the other way"
#70
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #70
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
If Bit Torrent is the second highest bandwidth user... and that's just ONE (possibly not even the biggest anymore...) method [what was the stat.. 98.7% of BitTorrent was infringment..], you can imagine that piracy is actually one of---Probably THE biggest use of traffic on any ISP's network..

There's a surefire disincentive for them to lift a finger, as their bread-n-butter is pirate traffic.. especially the more they move to usage models.
Thus, they need government regulations/rules to act, or they will continue to "look the other way"
it sure seems like an easy solution for ISP's to simply block bittorrent packets or get requests.

I dont think that was mentioned in the act either....
#71
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #71
Lives for gear
 
initialsBB's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
If Bit Torrent is the second highest bandwidth user... and that's just ONE (possibly not even the biggest anymore...) method [what was the stat.. 98.7% of BitTorrent was infringment..], you can imagine that piracy is actually one of---Probably THE biggest use of traffic on any ISP's network..
Actually no. That article I linked to said that "Netflix eats up 32.7 percent of peak downstream traffic" while "Second to Netflix is HTTP, which eats up with 17.8 percent of bandwidth, followed by YouTube at 10 percent and BitTorrent at 9 percent." Which means that all HTTP and bittorrent combined are still less than Netflix.

Later in the article it says "Netflix also makes up 29 percent of peak period aggregate traffic, with HTTP coming in second at 16.6 percent, and 23.3 percent of daily aggregate traffic; BitTorrent is second at 16.5 percent, according to stats collected in September." which is really unclear and confusing. But assuming that they mean netflix = 29%, http = 16.6, and BT = 16.5, then Netflix is still the bulk of traffic. Even if you assume 100% of the http traffic is pirated material (a ridiculous assumption), infringing content would only be 33% vs. Netflix's 29%.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
There's a surefire disincentive for them to lift a finger, as their bread-n-butter is pirate traffic..
Well, no not really. A few ISPs have only begun to meter data in the US and supposedly their caps only affect the upper 2% of users. So piracy is not the isps bread and butter, other than in a general sense that people upgraded to broadband so they could download audio and video (legaly or illegally). But they're trying to discourage people from using more bandwidth so clearly they don't want to promote bittorrent.

It's not about making more money from the heavier users since some ISPs will actually shut off user's service if they exceed the cap, and the prices they're charging for the extra data over the cap are highway robbery.

Data caps are entirely about the telcos 1: avoiding having to upgrade their infrastructure. 2: squashing the threat of Netflix in order to protect their dying cable businesses.
John Eppstein
Thread Starter
#72
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #72
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Allison View Post
That's one, sure.

If Congress is smart, they'll tackle this problem. Perhaps the angle they can approach it from is that we are under a constant hacking bombardment from China, and anonymous proxies are one of the methods China employs in the verifiable cyber-war they're currently waging against us.

Just a suggestion.
HOO-BOY! That's REALLY asking for opposition from the Civil Liberties gang.

Surefire way to not get the bill passed.

I'm not saying that the government shouldn't look into restrictions on proxies (or that they should - I'd prefer to keep well clear of that particular can of worms....) What I'm saying it that it would be out of place and ill-advised to try including it into an anti-piracy law, as the ramifications are far too wide reaching.
John Eppstein
Thread Starter
#73
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #73
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by initialsBB View Post
but they're very casual criminals engaging in a crime of opportunity. if you make that crime even marginally more difficult to accomplish you would stop the vast majority of offenders.
Kinda like swatting a fly with a 9 pound hammer....
#74
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #74
Lives for gear
 
initialsBB's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
so casual criminals, the ones who are really the problem in the matter and who are not paying for their music or software are innocent victims? please..... that is an insulting leap of logic.
btw, I think you're misunderstanding what I mean by casual criminal here. I said nothing about innocent victims. by casual I mean that most downloaders really do not put a whole lot of effort into it and they do it because it's easy and consequence-free. I agree with those who argue that making piracy a little more difficult and inconvenient would help a ton.
#75
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #75
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by initialsBB View Post
The answer to that is to upgrade the infrastructure, not scale back service. I understand that it must be frustrating to live in a country that has problems with its infrastructure but that's no reason to wish that other people should have to take a step backwards.
Huh?
That was exactly my point. There is an absolute cost to upgrading the infrastructure. Politicians would love to dump that cost on the telcos, but it's in the billions and likely the private sector telcos will opt to upgrade the urban centres, perhaps just a few square miles, leading to a multi speed society.
You don't seem to get the point.
Getting people to pay for data is one way of freeing up more space on hard pressed systems. Secondly, nothing in life is free, so exponential growth in data usage, thanks to smart phones and iPads is pressing governments and private tech companies to face the inadequacies of the current infrastructure now. This IS happening in America.
#76
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #76
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by initialsBB View Post
Data caps are entirely about the telcos 1: avoiding having to upgrade their infrastructure. 2: squashing the threat of Netflix in order to protect their dying cable businesses.
I don't think you are informed.
The cost of upgrade is so huge it probably has to be a government level investment. If the Telcos have to upgrade infrastructure themselves, they've already shown they will concentrate on profitable areas, mainly downtown financial and business hubs, and will likely need to pay for the upgrades somehow (higher fees for speed or for more data.


American broadband infrastructure: A national embarrassment - DailyFinance
Quote:
Art Brodsky, a spokesman for broadband-policy public-interest group Public Knowledge, goes further. "It's glaringly obvious that telecommunications policy for the past eight years has sent the U.S. in exactly the wrong direction," he says. "Whether it's our embarrassing data speeds or our ever-sinking rankings in broadband penetration, the trends have all gone the wrong way."
John Eppstein
Thread Starter
#77
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #77
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
Adam McGaughey, the webmaster of a fan site for the television show Stargate SG-1, was charged with copyright infringement and computer fraud. During the investigation, the FBI invoked a provision of the Act to obtain financial records from the site's Internet Service Provider.[10] The USA PATRIOT Act amended the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act to include search and seizure of records from Internet Service Providers.

the Patriot Act used against copyright violation....

is this inaccurate John? is it not germaine to the conversation of tools which presently exist in order to address copyright infringement?

if so, please expound....
No, it's not germane.

It has nothing at all to do with THIS BILL!

It's a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ISSUE!

It's like saying that shutting a local burger joint down for health violations has something to do with restaurant zoning laws.

THE TWO ISSUES HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH EACH OTHER!

Please stop attempting to muddy the water. It's murky enough as it is.

Leave the Patriot Act out of this. Especially when it's misapplied.

I'm really not understanding your thinking here. On the one hand you're opposing SOPA based on the rather flimsy premise that it might be misapplied. On the other hand you're pointing to and applauding the blatant and flagrant misuse of the Patriot Act and using it as a justification for "not needing" SOPA. The two views seem diametrically opposed to me. Subscribing to both of them would appear to be a classic case of doublethink. Either that or just indiscriminately grasping at any straw, no matter how tenuous and contradictory that seems like it might support your position. Or both.
#78
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #78
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
it sure seems like an easy solution for ISP's to simply block bittorrent packets or get requests.

I dont think that was mentioned in the act either....
Thing is, even though the majority of BT (actually the VAST majority) of BT traffic is used for piracy, there are legitimate uses for it.
Blizzard uses it to push patches for World of Warcraft, for example.

It doesn't make sense to block the protocol itself, just the illegal usage of it.

As is FTP is a protocol used for piracy as well.. you're not suggesting blocking that too? Heck.. most all protocols are used for illegal purposes..you'd have to shut down the entire internet if you started going after specific protocols.

Just like guns don't kill people, people kill people (err.. or maybe just bullets? )
John Eppstein
Thread Starter
#79
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #79
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
As is FTP is a protocol used for piracy as well.. you're not suggesting blocking that too? Heck.. most all protocols are used for illegal purposes..you'd have to shut down the entire internet if you started going after specific protocols.
Come to think of it, that WOULD make things a lot easier.


#80
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #80
Gear addict
 
Matt Allison's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
What "teeth" would you suggest?
How about one that actually did something?

I'm not sure where you're getting your opinion about kids not being tech-savvy these days, but you couldn't be more wrong.

Any kid that has figured out a way to steal music is not going to be deterred one bit by these sites being "blocked"; because as long as foreign proxies are a google search away, they aren't "blocked" in the least.

Hell, there's already a plug-in that does it for them:

mafiaafire.com

I have no interest in some bill passing that is nothing more than a Pyrrhic victory that lasts less than 24 hours.

Either present a bill that actually does something or go back to the drawing board and write one that does. Because we're not getting any more piracy legislation after this one.
#81
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #81
Lives for gear
 
initialsBB's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Getting people to pay for data is one way of freeing up more space on hard pressed systems. Secondly, nothing in life is free, so exponential growth in data usage, thanks to smart phones and iPads is pressing governments and private tech companies to face the inadequacies of the current infrastructure now. This IS happening in America.
except that where I live the infrastructure is fine and will be well into the foreseeable future. and yet people are saying that caps are coming even to fiber optic plans!? that doesn't make any sense, except as a power grab by the telcos.

There were a record number of cable cancellations in the US this year. I don't think it's a coincidence that that corresponds with Netflix overtaking all other internet traffic in the US and the telcos suddenly introducing data caps (that of course exempt their own TV-over-fiber services). VOIP is a factor here too. Telcos are seeing their monopolies dwindle away as people realize they don't need landlines or cable subscriptions, and data caps are a baldfaced attempt to turn back the clock on those emerging technologies.
#82
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #82
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

America goes beyond your neighborhood.
I hate the data plans myself, but if they eventuate in America it'll be because data use is currently out of control, not because some old system is being protected.
John Eppstein
Thread Starter
#83
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #83
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Allison View Post
Any kid that has figured out a way to steal music is not going to be deterred one bit by these sites being "blocked"; because as long as foreign proxies are a google search away, they aren't "blocked" in the least.
You don't get it.

If the sites are blocked they won't show in a google search. That's probably the most powerful part of the bill.

The simple fact of eliminating listings of pirated material in mainstream search engines will cut casual piracy rates by at least 75%, probably more. And casual piracy accounts for 80%-90% of music piracy.

Understand that if sites are then set up to take the place of search engines in locating pirate material those sites themselves can be blocked under the provisions of the bill. And if it can be demonstrated that a primary use of those proxies is facilitating piracy the proxies can be blocked and the sites linking to them can be blocked.

How many layers of circumventing blocks are users going to put up with before they just spend the damn 99 cents? Not many.

Most kids aren't geeks, nerds, or hackers and don't want to be. As long as piracy is a no-brainer it will be popular. Eliminate the no-brainer aspect and it loses its appeal pretty rapidly because, popular fiction notwithstanding, actually DOING all that stuff is BO-RING!

And I still don't see you coming up with any more effective suggestions. Or as even as effective. Or any practical suggestions at all, for that matter.
John Eppstein
Thread Starter
#84
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #84
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by initialsBB View Post
except that where I live the infrastructure is fine and will be well into the foreseeable future. and yet people are saying that caps are coming even to fiber optic plans!? that doesn't make any sense, except as a power grab by the telcos.
Data caps are coming SPECIFICALLY to fiber plans.

Is it a power/money grab? You bet!
#85
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #85
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

Of relevance:

The American Consumer Institute -
Quote:
national consumer survey conducted by the American Consumer Institute (ACI) finds that the vast majority of consumers support stronger intellectual property protections against trafficking of counterfeit goods. The survey of 800 consumers found 82% of consumers agreed that counterfeit goods, such as knock-off products, pirated software and imitation pharmacy drugs hurt the economy, with only 12% disagreeing. Consumers expressed support for increasing criminal penalties to protect against the sale of counterfeit goods, including:
  • 80% supporting legislation to increase criminal penalties for anyone who knowingly sells counterfeit goods, equipment and parts to the U.S. military (with 14% opposing);
  • 81% supporting legislation that would increase criminal penalties for anyone who knowingly sells counterfeit drugs and medicines to Americans online (with 13% opposing); and
  • 79% supporting legislation that would help block foreign-based Internet websites from trafficking counterfeit goods, content or services to Americans (with 14% opposing).
  • Overall, 82% of consumers agreed (including 58% that strongly agreed) that protecting copyrights, trademarks and patents of artists, authors, manufacturers and inventors encourages innovation and creativity, while only 10% disagreed (either somewhat or strongly) with that statement
#86
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #86
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

#87
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #87
Lives for gear
 
initialsBB's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
America goes beyond your neighborhood.
I hate the data plans myself, but if they eventuate in America it'll be because data use is currently out of control, not because some old system is being protected.
that's demonstrably false as evidenced by the fact that companies like at&t are offering unlimited streaming TV over the very same network they're claiming they have to cap due to congestion from Netflix. Congestion Pricing Myths Exposed: A Guide to the ‘Bandwidth Crisis’ at AT&T (Or Anywhere Else) | Stop the Cap!

I can't believe you're giving the telcos the benefit of the doubt on this issue. the fact is, if they're allowed to cap usage they will have no incentive to improve infrastructure. how many years has your data been metered in Australia and what sort of infrastructure improvements have gotten you in return? plus the data caps in some cases don't actually lead to bigger ISP profits since some providers simply shut off your service when you go over rather than charging you more. so it's clearly not about funding infrastructure improvements.
#88
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #88
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

They're obviously in the business of making money. I never said any different.
In your location the issue is possible data plans. In my location the issue is lack of infrastructure and speed.
Speeds dropping from 35% to 65% at peak hours is no myth.
Frankly I'd rather pay a little more than not be able to work due to mid 20th century cabling.
What I'm saying is likely you, or many like you wont be able to work either if the infrastructure isn't dramatically improved to reflect widespread iPhone and iPad use, plus iCloud music streaming and netflix etc....
John Eppstein
Thread Starter
#89
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #89
Gear Guru
 
John Eppstein's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by initialsBB View Post
that's demonstrably false as evidenced by the fact that companies like at&t are offering unlimited streaming TV over the very same network they're claiming they have to cap due to congestion from Netflix. Congestion Pricing Myths Exposed: A Guide to the ‘Bandwidth Crisis’ at AT&T (Or Anywhere Else) | Stop the Cap!
So who exactly is behind this site? They offer no obvious information about who owns or backs them, but the style of the site definitely suggests the hysterical rabblerousing of the freetard lobby....

So who are these yobbos, anyway?
#90
3rd December 2011
Old 3rd December 2011
  #90
Lives for gear
 
initialsBB's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
What I'm saying is likely you, or many like you wont be able to work either if the infrastructure isn't dramatically improved to reflect widespread iPhone and iPad use, plus iCloud music streaming and netflix etc....
ugh. sorry but you just don't get it. in my area the infrastructure is fine. in any area with fiber the infrastructure is already fine and there is no congestion. iphones use an entirely different technology and have nothing to do with the wired infrastructure.
Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
 
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.