Comments on: The Economist Speaks Out Against Regulation http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/ Keeping politicians' hands off the Net & everything else related to technology Fri, 25 May 2012 13:09:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: tramadol http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-32910 tramadol Mon, 22 Jan 2007 02:42:14 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/#comment-32910 <p>81e31de21f46 My homepage <a href="http://www.abc-acupuncture.com/baxqorav" rel="nofollow">tramadol</a> tramadol</p> 81e31de21f46 My homepage tramadol tramadol

]]> By: tramadol http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-47702 tramadol Mon, 22 Jan 2007 02:42:14 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/#comment-47702 <p>81e31de21f46 My homepage <a href="http://www.abc-acupuncture.com/baxqorav" rel="nofollow">tramadol</a> tramadol</p> 81e31de21f46 My homepage tramadol tramadol

]]> By: shorturl http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-32909 shorturl Wed, 20 Dec 2006 10:25:23 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/#comment-32909 <p>c8ba816e29b0 Nice site <a href="http:/0zu.tw/" rel="nofollow">shorturl</a> shorturl</p> c8ba816e29b0 Nice site shorturl shorturl

]]> By: shorturl http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-47701 shorturl Wed, 20 Dec 2006 10:25:23 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/#comment-47701 <p>c8ba816e29b0 Nice site <a href="http:/0zu.tw/" rel="nofollow">shorturl</a> shorturl</p> c8ba816e29b0 Nice site shorturl shorturl

]]> By: BudgetMan http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-32908 BudgetMan Mon, 13 Mar 2006 19:15:44 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/#comment-32908 <p>Nobody is twisting anything from what I can see. This proposed regulation is solving a problem that doesn't even exist, which is the only sure-fire way to disaster I am aware of. Who here would trust ANY politician to solve a problem that doesn't exist with technology they don't understand? OMG this could get horrific before it's all said and done!</p> Nobody is twisting anything from what I can see. This proposed regulation is solving a problem that doesn’t even exist, which is the only sure-fire way to disaster I am aware of. Who here would trust ANY politician to solve a problem that doesn’t exist with technology they don’t understand? OMG this could get horrific before it’s all said and done!

]]> By: BudgetMan http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-47700 BudgetMan Mon, 13 Mar 2006 19:15:44 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/#comment-47700 <p>Nobody is twisting anything from what I can see. This proposed regulation is solving a problem that doesn't even exist, which is the only sure-fire way to disaster I am aware of. Who here would trust ANY politician to solve a problem that doesn't exist with technology they don't understand? OMG this could get horrific before it's all said and done!</p> Nobody is twisting anything from what I can see. This proposed regulation is solving a problem that doesn’t even exist, which is the only sure-fire way to disaster I am aware of. Who here would trust ANY politician to solve a problem that doesn’t exist with technology they don’t understand? OMG this could get horrific before it’s all said and done!

]]> By: BudgetMan http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-32907 BudgetMan Mon, 13 Mar 2006 19:05:08 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/#comment-32907 <p>Nobody is twisting anything from what I can see. This proposed regulation is solving a problem that doesn't even exist, which is the only sure-fire way to disaster I am aware of. Who here would trust ANY politician to solve a problem that doesn't exist with technology they don't understand? OMG this could get horrific before it's all said and done!</p> Nobody is twisting anything from what I can see. This proposed regulation is solving a problem that doesn’t even exist, which is the only sure-fire way to disaster I am aware of. Who here would trust ANY politician to solve a problem that doesn’t exist with technology they don’t understand? OMG this could get horrific before it’s all said and done!

]]> By: BudgetMan http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-47699 BudgetMan Mon, 13 Mar 2006 19:05:08 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/#comment-47699 <p>Nobody is twisting anything from what I can see. This proposed regulation is solving a problem that doesn't even exist, which is the only sure-fire way to disaster I am aware of. Who here would trust ANY politician to solve a problem that doesn't exist with technology they don't understand? OMG this could get horrific before it's all said and done!</p> Nobody is twisting anything from what I can see. This proposed regulation is solving a problem that doesn’t even exist, which is the only sure-fire way to disaster I am aware of. Who here would trust ANY politician to solve a problem that doesn’t exist with technology they don’t understand? OMG this could get horrific before it’s all said and done!

]]> By: MikeT http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-32906 MikeT Fri, 10 Mar 2006 16:45:20 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/#comment-32906 <p>How about any service whose primary purpose/usage is not illegal? BitTorrent was created for the distribution of large files like ISO images of Linux. Its purpose was for that sort of thing, whereas Gnutella was created as a way of sharing files a la Napster. In other words it might require a sensible judge and jury, rather than a set in stone legal explanation that has a one-size-fits-all judgement.</p> How about any service whose primary purpose/usage is not illegal? BitTorrent was created for the distribution of large files like ISO images of Linux. Its purpose was for that sort of thing, whereas Gnutella was created as a way of sharing files a la Napster. In other words it might require a sensible judge and jury, rather than a set in stone legal explanation that has a one-size-fits-all judgement.

]]> By: MikeT http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-47698 MikeT Fri, 10 Mar 2006 16:45:20 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/#comment-47698 <p>How about any service whose primary purpose/usage is not illegal? BitTorrent was created for the distribution of large files like ISO images of Linux. Its purpose was for that sort of thing, whereas Gnutella was created as a way of sharing files a la Napster. In other words it might require a sensible judge and jury, rather than a set in stone legal explanation that has a one-size-fits-all judgement.</p> How about any service whose primary purpose/usage is not illegal? BitTorrent was created for the distribution of large files like ISO images of Linux. Its purpose was for that sort of thing, whereas Gnutella was created as a way of sharing files a la Napster. In other words it might require a sensible judge and jury, rather than a set in stone legal explanation that has a one-size-fits-all judgement.

]]> By: naiserie http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-32905 naiserie Fri, 10 Mar 2006 16:31:41 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/#comment-32905 <p>meh, the more I read re: network neutrality, the less of a big deal the whole affair becomes.</p> <p>MikeT: I suppose you will be appointed to determine the "legitimate services"?</p> meh, the more I read re: network neutrality, the less of a big deal the whole affair becomes.

MikeT: I suppose you will be appointed to determine the “legitimate services”?

]]> By: naiserie http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-47697 naiserie Fri, 10 Mar 2006 16:31:41 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/#comment-47697 <p>meh, the more I read re: network neutrality, the less of a big deal the whole affair becomes.<br><br>MikeT: I suppose you will be appointed to determine the "legitimate services"?</p> meh, the more I read re: network neutrality, the less of a big deal the whole affair becomes.

MikeT: I suppose you will be appointed to determine the “legitimate services”?

]]> By: MikeT http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-32904 MikeT Fri, 10 Mar 2006 14:45:35 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/#comment-32904 <p>The problem that I have with it is that they are twisting QoS into a weapon against the services that their users may legitimately want. Since my ISP is supposed to be primarily concerned with providing me the connection, who are they to throttle a VoIP service that I receive over the connection that I leased? Are they just glorified web and email providers these days? I agree with their efforts to throttle our outright eliminate certain protocols like Gnutella or eDonkey because they are almost always used for destructive and illegal purposes, but what business do they have throttling and denying access to legitimate services? Yes, the neutrality mandate that is being proposed is overly broad, but the problem is that if there is nothing in place, the ISPs will be allowed to turn an "Internet" service into a web service with some email thrown in when in fact the Internet is nothing more than TCP/IP and UDP.</p> The problem that I have with it is that they are twisting QoS into a weapon against the services that their users may legitimately want. Since my ISP is supposed to be primarily concerned with providing me the connection, who are they to throttle a VoIP service that I receive over the connection that I leased? Are they just glorified web and email providers these days? I agree with their efforts to throttle our outright eliminate certain protocols like Gnutella or eDonkey because they are almost always used for destructive and illegal purposes, but what business do they have throttling and denying access to legitimate services? Yes, the neutrality mandate that is being proposed is overly broad, but the problem is that if there is nothing in place, the ISPs will be allowed to turn an “Internet” service into a web service with some email thrown in when in fact the Internet is nothing more than TCP/IP and UDP.

]]> By: MikeT http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-47696 MikeT Fri, 10 Mar 2006 14:45:35 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/10/the-economist-speaks-out-against-regulation/#comment-47696 <p>The problem that I have with it is that they are twisting QoS into a weapon against the services that their users may legitimately want. Since my ISP is supposed to be primarily concerned with providing me the connection, who are they to throttle a VoIP service that I receive over the connection that I leased? Are they just glorified web and email providers these days? I agree with their efforts to throttle our outright eliminate certain protocols like Gnutella or eDonkey because they are almost always used for destructive and illegal purposes, but what business do they have throttling and denying access to legitimate services? Yes, the neutrality mandate that is being proposed is overly broad, but the problem is that if there is nothing in place, the ISPs will be allowed to turn an "Internet" service into a web service with some email thrown in when in fact the Internet is nothing more than TCP/IP and UDP.</p> The problem that I have with it is that they are twisting QoS into a weapon against the services that their users may legitimately want. Since my ISP is supposed to be primarily concerned with providing me the connection, who are they to throttle a VoIP service that I receive over the connection that I leased? Are they just glorified web and email providers these days? I agree with their efforts to throttle our outright eliminate certain protocols like Gnutella or eDonkey because they are almost always used for destructive and illegal purposes, but what business do they have throttling and denying access to legitimate services? Yes, the neutrality mandate that is being proposed is overly broad, but the problem is that if there is nothing in place, the ISPs will be allowed to turn an “Internet” service into a web service with some email thrown in when in fact the Internet is nothing more than TCP/IP and UDP.

]]>