7 ms·
Ajit Pai and the FCC want it to be legal for Comcast to block BitTorrent
- thisisit 9y agoI can be wrong, but something similar might happen to Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies too.
- shadoxx 9y agoMy thoughts exactly. Blocking arbitrary protocols is a slippery slope.
- karmapolic 9y agoi think the first step to start a revolution against these cronies is to talk about net neutrality in your hoa if you are part of one and find ways to ensure comcast does not have a monopoly.
- toast0 9y agoIf we're going back to the past, let's go back to the 1996 Telecom act, and get unbundled last mile; but apply it to all mediums this time, instead of only telephone. I don't care if Comcast blocks BitTorrent for its direct customers, as long as it doesn't touch it for wholesale customers, and as long as wholesale prices are lower than retail prices (learning from Telco dsl pricing shenanigans)
- imglorp 9y agoOh boy, all the market forces are lined up against the consumers on this one. BT implies content holders have a teensy bit of interest: around $2 trillion annually[1]. That dwarfs by 20x the $1B cable industry[2]. Maybe we've been looking for for Ajit's daddy in the wrong place. 1. https://www.billboard.com/biz/articles/news/global/1565728/study-global-entertainment-industry-poised-to-top-2-trillion-in https://www.billboard.com/biz/articles/news/global/1565728/s... 2. https://www.ibisworld.com/industry-trends/market-research-reports/information/broadcasting-telecommunications/cable-providers.html https://www.ibisworld.com/industry-trends/market-research-re...
- tehlike 9y agoSomeone will come in and give free vpn for everyone, then they are royally hosed.
- glandium 9y agoUntil Comcast blocks VPNs, because why wouldn't they?
- tehlike 9y agoYou mean, ala Great Firewall? I can't imagine that happening, but who knows.
- visarga 9y agoWell, worst case, we turn to massive hard drives, darknets and sneakernet, like Cuba.
- zaarn 9y agoBecause Comcast at their heart is a good company who has the best interest of their customer in mind in everything they do.
- throwaway613834 9y agoHow do you just "block VPNs"? Corporations need them don't they?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- zaarn 9y agoBuy the Business & Work VPN Package for just 5,99$/m so even you can connect to your workplace remotely without having to worry about your datacap!!!
- arbie 9y agoBack when Verizon introduced data plans, it was called "Business email and internet access" or some such, and it cost $30. This is a great way for ISPs to milk legitimate VPN traffic _and_ tax downloaders.
- anigbrowl 9y agoMesh networking time
- ZenoArrow 9y agoIf you want to see that come to pass, I'd recommend trying out CJDNS and/or B.A.T.M.A.N and documenting your experiences: https://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdns/blob/master/README.md https://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdns/blob/master/README.md https://www.open-mesh.org/projects/open-mesh/wiki https://www.open-mesh.org/projects/open-mesh/wiki
- INTPenis 9y agoI'm more interested in whether it will be illegal to circumvent the legal block of a protocol.
- twelvedogs 9y agonot immediately, they could pass extra laws though (and probably will if they get momentum)
- jokoon 9y agoOk, I'm really scared now... I mean if legally they can block bittorrent or other protocols, does it mean that one could create a new protocol each time it's legal to block it, rince and repeat, and force the legislator to create a new law forbidding each nez appearing protocol? Also one might implement ways to prevent protocol detection into a BEP, but if comcast ends up shutting down any traffic that is peer to peer... I wonder if legally they could forbid any traffic that is "too much peer to peer" and argue that it's illegal downloading. Hard to say if comcast could win in court, because if you do the stats, most of peer to peer traffic is indeed illegal. The internet could end up without any peer to peer traffic, and only works with servers, most users would not really complain, things would still work like they already are. It would really create pressure from users to change ISP. Some ISPs might not block peer to peer, and I wonder if subscribers would end up moving out of neighborhoods where comcast has a monopoly.
- croon 9y agoAFAICT it's not about making bittorrent illegal, but to make it legal for ISPs to block any specific protocol. I'm assuming you're thinking in terms of designer drug legislation? Comcast in this case would simply need to match the new protocols to block, no new legislation needed.
- ThrustVectoring 9y agoObvious first-line defense is to make the peer-to-peer traffic indistinguishable from use of important services: eg, Google App Engine for peer discovery, and VoIP for data transmission.
- jakeogh 9y agoIf my ISP filters by protocol I'll get a new ISP. It should be standard to: 1. Cancel your acct. 2. (nd amendment) use protocol 6 port 443; emulate SSL Why ignore one's ability to apply market forces? Is acting too hard? Extra LOL on the thought of filtering BT. Who pay's who?
- dmarlow 9y agoI have a choice between Time warner (now spectrum) or ATT. I have zero confidence in either and my choices are slim. I'd rather have net neutrality enforced so I'm not left having to choose which of those two I'd rather use.
- jakeogh 9y agoSounds like you are a prime customer for a 3rd option. Market forces are real. BTW, since you have 2, competition is still there. Zero confidence or not, one will take advantage of the other's mistake. Do you also have telco DSL avail?
- twelvedogs 9y agochanging ISP isn't that simple for a very large chunk of americans, their options are one of the duopoly or dialup.
- jakeogh 9y agoSo attack the real problem (more options aka free market) instead of asking for more rules.
- twelvedogs 9y agoi guess you could quantify that as the real problem if you like, it's a much harder problem however. the incumbents are currently successfully shutting out big competition from putting in their own infrastructure (google has been successfully blocked from areas by lawsuits, along with municipal ISPs). edit: and even if competition was unfettered, it would still take many years and a lot of investment to provide real alternatives giving a shit about what the "right" way to deal with these assholes is probably not that productive.
- sergers 9y agoThe foundation for the great firewall of America has been laid. Trump admires china, and promised a wall.. we just had the wrong context. But seriously this sucks... But I am sure evolution of the protocol to thwart detection will happen. Vps/seedbox usage would go up as a quick bypass... But who knows, this could allow them to block whole network segments in worst case scenario. I can see this play out like long distance plans
- eqtn 9y agoThis wouldn't work. Only pre approved streams will be allowed.
- golemiprague 9y agoStop the panic, the internet existed for years without those regulations that he wants to cancel which were applied only in 2015. I prefer the government will not touch it, it will just ruin everything, if you are worried about US becoming China you have to remember that it is government regulation in China which cause the problems, not the ISPs. ISP is a pretty competitive landscape and I am sure if one of them block something there will be other ones which will be happy to offer unlimited services, the way it was until 2015 without those regulations. If something really bad actually happen I will want to see the government interfere but to call the government to interfere with no reason and no real problem is just going to do more harm than good.
- unabridged 9y agoThe problem is you can't tell bittorrent or any other protocol from SSL if its encrypted. The only way to stop it is slow all random ip to random ip connections, basically if one of the endpoints isn't a major, known company its in the slow lane. Count on AWS creating a few Canadian regions.
- svet_0 9y agoAFAIK You can still use statistical analysis to determine the app type under SSL. I'm not sure you can even eliminate that with protocol improvements.
- ForFreedom 9y agoThe government does not understand that, the more they restrict, people will find alternatives. Privacy of movies/songs is still on in-spite of all laws