3 ms·

Sorry I wasn't trying to blame AT&T. I was pointing out that the uproar was due to a vacuum of legit information, so the only noise echoing around the net was t

Sorry I wasn't trying to blame AT&T. I was pointing out that the uproar was due to a vacuum of legit information, so the only noise echoing around the net was that put out by the tin hats. I said AT&T could have nipped this in the bud by responding sooner or providing a log of blocks/unblocks, not that I honestly expect it to. You're totally right that it was most likely a low level decision, and it would be impossible for some AT&T tech to know that img.4chan.org is not the same as joesblog.nowhereville.com, which no one would notice being blocked for a day. So yeah, re-reading my comment, I can see how it comes across that I am blaming all this on AT&T. Honestly, when this started, and the only signal was "AT&T was censoring the internet", I was even mad at them for it. But we have since learned otherwise, and I wasn't trying to demonize them here... just pointing out the factors that combined to bring about the overreaction.

jm4 17y ago
When I first read your comment it did seem like you were blaming ATT. In retrospect that may be because I was thinking about it in the context of all this nerd rage over this thing. Maybe I jumped the gun a little bit.
devicenull 17y ago
Right, but there's no way to tell img.4chan.org from some random blog. Sure you can look at whois, but if you do this in this case, you get NetAssist, which seems to be the hosting company. It's likely they never forwarded the messages to the owners of the server. Unless you expect the DC techs to nmap servers to find services to identify them. Would you know the IP to HN if it popped up in a firewall log?
- Xichekolas 17y ago
  Which is exactly what I meant when I said this: "and it would be impossible for some AT&T tech to know that img.4chan.org is not the same as joesblog.nowhereville.com, which no one would notice being blocked for a day" But you said it much better than I could.
  - devicenull 17y ago
    Ah right, I had thought you were talking about the issues caused by blocking them, not necessarily recognizing them.

jm4 17y ago

When I first read your comment it did seem like you were blaming ATT. In retrospect that may be because I was thinking about it in the context of all this nerd rage over this thing. Maybe I jumped the gun a little bit.

devicenull 17y ago

Right, but there's no way to tell img.4chan.org from some random blog. Sure you can look at whois, but if you do this in this case, you get NetAssist, which seems to be the hosting company. It's likely they never forwarded the messages to the owners of the server. Unless you expect the DC techs to nmap servers to find services to identify them. Would you know the IP to HN if it popped up in a firewall log?

Xichekolas 17y ago
Which is exactly what I meant when I said this: "and it would be impossible for some AT&T tech to know that img.4chan.org is not the same as joesblog.nowhereville.com, which no one would notice being blocked for a day" But you said it much better than I could.
- devicenull 17y ago
  Ah right, I had thought you were talking about the issues caused by blocking them, not necessarily recognizing them.