how-to block ads
|
Crypto
Premium
join:2001-01-07
Saint Charles, MO
1 edit | reply to haplo2112
Re: A request to Charter Cable admin staff
said by haplo2112  :The TOS is crap that would never actually stand up with seriously challenged. I had a lawyer look it over once, and he told me quite simply "ignore it, its unenforceable, if they ever cut off your service, and pointed to the TOS/AUP you'd own the company when we were done with them." I think your lawyer is wrong. You've entered into an service agreement with the ISP, one in which either of you may discontinue at any time for any reason. If they want to kill your service for running servers, (Which is clearly against the agreement you entered into) they're certainly free to do so.
If you want to change the system, vote with your wallet and go somewhere that doesnt have an onerous AUP. Dont just run your server and then complain about it on the internet, because then they never notice that customers want more.
But dont be surprised when it costs triple what Charter's service does, because that business model will be based off people using their connections all the time, so the ISP is paying for a lot more bandwidth.
You're apparently so old school you dont think the internet should be profitable. | |
neofate
Caveat Depascor
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Birmingham, AL
| reply to haplo2112
said by haplo2112 : If I wish get a connection through charter or whoever, I should be able to use that connection for whatever purpose I wish, without having to involve anyone else in the matter. That is how it works, for the majority. Though the 'ideal' of the internet, and a private company providing the 'end user' access for a premium is comparing apples to oranges.
You pay them for their service,.. if what they offer isn't what you agree with, then you don't and shouldn't pay them for that 'private' network access.
Charter, in this example, has the right to do what ever they want with their service offerings. They simple have to provide you with a connection to the public internet, that is somewhat reliable, and meets a reasonable standard of 'speeds' you are paying for.
There are no 'internet laws' that demand a private ISP 'allow' Mail servers, Bit Torrent, etc. More later..
said by haplo2112 : If I want to run my own mail, ftp, web, bittorrent, etc server its none of anyone elses business.
I agree
Your business is none of anyone else's business if it isn't A) Illegal, and B) Hurting anyone else, C) Effecting the network in a negative manner (Which falls into B).
said by haplo2112 :I pay Charter for the Bandwidth to get my machine(s) connected, end of story. Their end of the bargin is to provide me the connection and keep the network functioning. I disagree -- You are paying for shared bandwidth, that is substantially cheaper than what you are describing in the overall tone of this post. You get to pay 30-75$ a Month for a 3/5, or 10Meg connection, that does allow most of what you insist is your god given right due to the 'internet model'.
It really boils down to this -- You are going Through a private, mass, shared pipe. Something like an OC-96. For a pretty fair deal.
Your ideals are right , only if you were to be going through a 'non - shared' connection to the 'Internet'. For example, if you were to purchase an DS1 or DS3 Pipe yourself. You, straight to the net. Still being provided by 'someone', of course,.. But in this example your skipping the whole 'Charter/MSO' part, and going right to the 'backbone' part.
In this manner you can run whatever you want (that isn't malicious or harmful) all day long.
But,.. of course,.. You'll be paying 500-5,000 Dollars or more a month. *That* is the difference.
said by haplo2112 : As long as I am not doing anything to damage someone else's machine(s) on the network, spewing Virus and such...our relationship is concluded. I or someone else is spewing virus/worms etc and infecting other machines thats the point in the relationship that Charter should get involved, and cut off that one person's access. This is not something that is actively detected by MSO's on a 'specific' narrow scale. They don't have the resources, money, and man-power to monitor every user's data and further, to determine if that data is what the end user is 'meaning' to create, if it is safe, and so on. Most of the malicious mail servers, spam bots, and so on.. Are being run without the end-user having a clue. They are for all intensive purposes innocent, but it doesn't stop the crime. Nor is this actively being detected in a way that is resolving the problem.
(In this regard, preventative measures are the best way to stop this) -- These measures start to creep into your philosophy of the MSO getting too involved in the whole from your end to the internet. Their preventative measures do block ports, shape traffic, stop certain data from ever reaching your machine, and so forth. Some of this overlaps and causing other services *not* to work.. but by and large, I haven't found alot of 'net' censorship by Charter. In fact, they are one of the better MSO's in this regard, imo.
said by haplo2112 :It is my further belief that they should being doing quite the opposite of the original post. They should be working to police and clean up their IP ranges, and get them UNBLOCKED by outfits like spamhaus and the like, so users like myself can go about our day like proper internet citizens, using the net for its true peer to peer intended purpose. Don't get me wrong,.. I am all for the 'most' freedom that can be used responsibly. I just don't kid myself into thinking I have some 'right' to demand a straight 10Meg pipe to the internet with no strings attached. I understand network administration, and how you have to take the good with the bad,.. and as an administrator , sometimes, you have to place a small evil in place to reduce a large evil.
Analogy -- Using an A/V TSR, eating valuable resources and processor speed, but as a result the machine is still running 'clean' 6 months from now. I often place a bit stronger, more thorough, AV schemes on particular clients machines that time and time again I am having to go clean up from irresponsible Internet surfing. (Or as some might say, stupidity). Where for some clients, very little, or even no resident processing is necessary.
I am, too, old school -- But my whole point is that we are running through an entity,.. Called Charter Communications. We are obtaining very gracious speeds (that imo are being under appreciated these days),.. for very low prices. The price bears some of the consequence. (Consequence I can live with).
Though I am all for better 'policing' or basic monitoring of the overall networks,.. It benefits all.
I am not for residential connections being terminated when such 'mail servers' are found running. Because likely the end-user would not be notified, and have no clue what happened to their connection. (As I said before, this user is probably unaware this is occurring). Now a process that can change provisioning down to say, a minimal, Quarter meg speed, WITH notification of 'why'.. would be fine, even good. With that notification could be a service, or referral to such a service that would correct the problem, and once corrected the speeds would be re provisioned 'automatically' -- (Once the malicious spam traffic stopped,.. it would be detected automatically and connection speed placed back to original). Some serious Fuzzy logic going.. hehe.
--
Life is not a problem to be solved, but a reality to be experienced. | |
neofate
Caveat Depascor
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Birmingham, AL
| reply to haplo2112
said by haplo2112 :The TOS is crap that would never actually stand up with seriously challenged. I had a lawyer look it over once, and he told me quite simply "ignore it, its unenforceable, if they ever cut off your service, and pointed to the TOS/AUP you'd own the company when we were done with them." . That lawyer is ignorant. You would hardly 'own' the company if you challenged them for cutting off your service. In fact, a private company can cut your HSI service and reimburse you for whatever you have paid for and have not received for that 'month', and never turn it back on.
It is a service, and they aren't bound by law to allow you to use it. You make it sound like an ironclad contract with a government agency that denied you healthcare that cost you a Limb or something.
Remember the acronym 'MSO' ? It stands for Multi-Media Service Provider. That word 'service' really means, service,.. and further it is a luxury.
CATV is a little different, but still they can deny that if they have reason.. they don't need reason for the HSI. (And, I would guess they 'might' not need a reason for all of their services.. though I am skeptical on the CATV due to Franchise clauses).
You really, honestly, brought your TOS to a lawyer? Wow,.. only in America eh? hehe.
--
Life is not a problem to be solved, but a reality to be experienced. | |
stivvy
Technonerd
join:2002-05-08
| reply to haplo2112
said by haplo2112 :The TOS is crap that would never actually stand up with seriously challenged. I had a lawyer look it over once, and he told me quite simply "ignore it, its unenforceable, if they ever cut off your service, and pointed to the TOS/AUP you'd own the company when we were done with them." For the mpost part I do very little other that run my mail serve on my connection the web, FTP, shoutcast are mostly there as a form of protest...or perhaps civil disobience. Bulls***
And if you owned the company you would be 19billion in debt anyway.
Its their network. They make the rules for that particular level of service. While I'll admit that if you don't get caught you'll be ok, and there is a good chance that you won't get caught, they have the right to decide who gets to use their network and who doesn't.
You act like they are a public utility, when what they really are is a for-profit (though not very good at the profit part) corporation. | |
|
