4 ms·

If 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

If 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 ago
I 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 ago
  Sounds 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 ago
changing ISP isn't that simple for a very large chunk of americans, their options are one of the duopoly or dialup.
- jakeogh 9y ago
  So attack the real problem (more options aka free market) instead of asking for more rules.
  - twelvedogs 9y ago
    i 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.
    - jakeogh 9y ago
      Na. Giving a shit is the only thing that actually changes stuff. And it's not harder since NN is dead. It's gone and by 2020 people will understand the opposition to axing it's short existence was pointless. We should focus on what you appear to agree matters more; more competition.
      - twelvedogs 9y ago
        ultimately the issue is laws in favor of the incumbents, while more competition would absolutely be a better solution long term if laws aren't being made to ensure net neutrality laws are definitely not going to be made to allow more competition.
      - croon 9y ago
        Three years + voting + a number of more years for execution is a long time to wait to possibly get back to an open internet (with real competition for web services as you seem to like).
        jakeogh 9y ago
        Open? Like the ~25 years before 'NN'? I was there. Competition works. NN is just a typical BS branding for "More Rules". It's step 0 in the standard manual on mission creep.
        croon 9y ago
        > Open? Like the ~25 years before 'NN'? I was there. Competition works. The 25 years when internet was accessed over telephone wire which was regulated as a utility? Do you even know why NN came to be? > NN is just a typical BS branding for "More Rules". It's step 0 in the standard manual on mission creep. In this evil governmental overreach conspiracy, who do you think benefits from these "More Rules"? What's their motive?
        jakeogh 9y ago
im3w1l 9y ago
Just like you don't buy intel anymore because of the management engine right ;)
- jakeogh 9y ago
  CORRECT. Ditto for cars. Lock me out of the HSCAN bus and I guarantee I wont buy it. So far, I can hack my way in, and similarly I can disable ME, but yes, I will _happily_ pay extra to wadge the war for general purpose computing.
acranox 9y ago
Where I used to live, in a major American city, my choice was Comcast for broadband. Or dialup at 56k. Or DSL at maybe less than 1mbit/sec. a lot of Americans don’t have any true choice of ISP. This is why we want regulation. The free market idea didn’t provide the choice that a free market needs in order to be fair.

dmarlow 9y ago

I 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 ago
Sounds 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 ago

changing ISP isn't that simple for a very large chunk of americans, their options are one of the duopoly or dialup.

jakeogh 9y ago
So attack the real problem (more options aka free market) instead of asking for more rules.
- twelvedogs 9y ago
  i 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.
  - jakeogh 9y ago
    Na. Giving a shit is the only thing that actually changes stuff. And it's not harder since NN is dead. It's gone and by 2020 people will understand the opposition to axing it's short existence was pointless. We should focus on what you appear to agree matters more; more competition.
    - twelvedogs 9y ago
      ultimately the issue is laws in favor of the incumbents, while more competition would absolutely be a better solution long term if laws aren't being made to ensure net neutrality laws are definitely not going to be made to allow more competition.
    - croon 9y ago
      Three years + voting + a number of more years for execution is a long time to wait to possibly get back to an open internet (with real competition for web services as you seem to like).
      - jakeogh 9y ago
        Open? Like the ~25 years before 'NN'? I was there. Competition works. NN is just a typical BS branding for "More Rules". It's step 0 in the standard manual on mission creep.
        croon 9y ago
        > Open? Like the ~25 years before 'NN'? I was there. Competition works. The 25 years when internet was accessed over telephone wire which was regulated as a utility? Do you even know why NN came to be? > NN is just a typical BS branding for "More Rules". It's step 0 in the standard manual on mission creep. In this evil governmental overreach conspiracy, who do you think benefits from these "More Rules"? What's their motive?
        jakeogh 9y ago

im3w1l 9y ago

Just like you don't buy intel anymore because of the management engine right ;)

jakeogh 9y ago
CORRECT. Ditto for cars. Lock me out of the HSCAN bus and I guarantee I wont buy it. So far, I can hack my way in, and similarly I can disable ME, but yes, I will _happily_ pay extra to wadge the war for general purpose computing.

acranox 9y ago

Where I used to live, in a major American city, my choice was Comcast for broadband. Or dialup at 56k. Or DSL at maybe less than 1mbit/sec. a lot of Americans don’t have any true choice of ISP. This is why we want regulation. The free market idea didn’t provide the choice that a free market needs in order to be fair.