Comments on: Winners and Losers http://techliberation.com/2008/08/29/winners-and-losers/ Keeping politicians' hands off the Net & everything else related to technology Fri, 19 Mar 2010 02:44:23 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: eee_eff http://techliberation.com/2008/08/29/winners-and-losers/comment-page-1/#comment-65763 eee_eff Tue, 02 Sep 2008 00:47:11 +0000 http://techliberation.com/?p=12322#comment-65763 <i>FCC Chairman Kevin Martin recently asked, “Would you be OK with the post office opening your mail, deciding they didn’t want to bother delivering it, and hiding that fact by sending it back to you stamped ‘address unknown – return to sender’?”</i><br><br>Hance, that's a fair question, I presume that you believe the post office should be able to do that?<br><br><i>Martin sided with the commission’s two Democrats to slam Comcast for managing its broadband network like a traffic cop who works hard to prevent gridlock.</i><br><br>But again you ignore two critical aspects:<br><br>(1) that Comcast particularly targeted one protocol (bit-torrent) irrespective of the bandwidth involved. It did not for example target streaming video, even that had more of an issue for network protocols.<br>and <br><br>(2) Comcast lied, commiting FRAUD repeatedly. It's on FAQS said that IT DID NOT INTERFERE WITH BIT TORRENT UPLAODS OR DOWNLOADS. It did, in fact, interfere with both.<br><br>Are you OK with companies commiting fraud, and if you are not OK with that, shouldn't Comcast be punished? FCC Chairman Kevin Martin recently asked, “Would you be OK with the post office opening your mail, deciding they didn’t want to bother delivering it, and hiding that fact by sending it back to you stamped ‘address unknown – return to sender’?”

Hance, that's a fair question, I presume that you believe the post office should be able to do that?

Martin sided with the commission’s two Democrats to slam Comcast for managing its broadband network like a traffic cop who works hard to prevent gridlock.

But again you ignore two critical aspects:

(1) that Comcast particularly targeted one protocol (bit-torrent) irrespective of the bandwidth involved. It did not for example target streaming video, even that had more of an issue for network protocols.
and

(2) Comcast lied, commiting FRAUD repeatedly. It's on FAQS said that IT DID NOT INTERFERE WITH BIT TORRENT UPLAODS OR DOWNLOADS. It did, in fact, interfere with both.

Are you OK with companies commiting fraud, and if you are not OK with that, shouldn't Comcast be punished?

]]> By: eee_eff http://techliberation.com/2008/08/29/winners-and-losers/comment-page-1/#comment-56036 eee_eff Mon, 01 Sep 2008 20:47:11 +0000 http://techliberation.com/?p=12322#comment-56036 <i>FCC Chairman Kevin Martin recently asked, “Would you be OK with the post office opening your mail, deciding they didn’t want to bother delivering it, and hiding that fact by sending it back to you stamped ‘address unknown – return to sender’?”</i><br><br>Hance, that's a fair question, I presume that you believe the post office should be able to do that?<br><br><i>Martin sided with the commission’s two Democrats to slam Comcast for managing its broadband network like a traffic cop who works hard to prevent gridlock.</i><br><br>But again you ignore two critical aspects:<br><br>(1) that Comcast particularly targeted one protocol (bit-torrent) irrespective of the bandwidth involved. It did not for example target streaming video, even that had more of an issue for network protocols.<br>and <br><br>(2) Comcast lied, commiting FRAUD repeatedly. It's on FAQS said that IT DID NOT INTERFERE WITH BIT TORRENT UPLAODS OR DOWNLOADS. It did, in fact, interfere with both.<br><br>Are you OK with companies commiting fraud, and if you are not OK with that, shouldn't Comcast be punished? FCC Chairman Kevin Martin recently asked, “Would you be OK with the post office opening your mail, deciding they didn’t want to bother delivering it, and hiding that fact by sending it back to you stamped ‘address unknown – return to sender’?”

Hance, that's a fair question, I presume that you believe the post office should be able to do that?

Martin sided with the commission’s two Democrats to slam Comcast for managing its broadband network like a traffic cop who works hard to prevent gridlock.

But again you ignore two critical aspects:

(1) that Comcast particularly targeted one protocol (bit-torrent) irrespective of the bandwidth involved. It did not for example target streaming video, even that had more of an issue for network protocols.
and

(2) Comcast lied, commiting FRAUD repeatedly. It's on FAQS said that IT DID NOT INTERFERE WITH BIT TORRENT UPLAODS OR DOWNLOADS. It did, in fact, interfere with both.

Are you OK with companies commiting fraud, and if you are not OK with that, shouldn't Comcast be punished?

]]> By: mwendy http://techliberation.com/2008/08/29/winners-and-losers/comment-page-1/#comment-56029 mwendy Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:28:38 +0000 http://techliberation.com/?p=12322#comment-56029 The decision/order will likely fail because of APA infirmities, etc. Yet the reflexive action - the FCC's need to jettison markets and their underlying incentitve system - remains highly troubling. The decision/order will likely fail because of APA infirmities, etc. Yet the reflexive action – the FCC's need to jettison markets and their underlying incentitve system – remains highly troubling.

]]>