how-to block ads
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
| "Public Shame" does not keep a telecom honest...
June 14, 2006 Testimony of Comcast Executive Vice President David L. Cohen: "If Comcast were to try to deny, delay, or degrade the Internet experience that our more than nine million cable Internet customers have paid for, how can we possibly expect to keep them as customers...Any provider that does not meet the needs of users will suffer from a serious backlash from consumers and policymakers."
May 2007: »Comcast is using Sandvine to manage P2P Connections
So Verizon (who I am really not worried about) is demonstrably wrong.
That said, didn't we see a voluntary set of guidelines last summer as NebuAd was running around? In fact, haven't we seen 3-4 sets of voluntary guidelines since this debate started? Seems the only thing we've accomplished is to create multiple sets of guidelines!
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL
Evil does seek to maintain power by suppressing the truth, or by misleading the innocent. --Spock and McCoy stardate 5029.5 | |
TheWickerMan
join:2002-04-09
Enola, PA
| said by funchords  : That said, didn't we see a voluntary set of guidelines last summer as NebuAd was running around? There was one for the telemarketing industry as well, and we all know how well that worked. | |
jaminus
join:2004-10-14
Arlington, VA
| reply to funchords
Statistically speaking, the vast majority of Comcast subscribers were unaffected by Comcast's implementation of Sandvine (right?) so it's not all that surprising that public shame alone did not cause Comcast to change its behavior. NebuAd-style DPI, however, casts a far wider 'net' than P2P upload TCP resets, so it would presumably incite 'public shame' to a greater extent.
Also, having multiple sets of privacy guidelines is probably better than having a single set. The same privacy practices that make sense for your ISP to follow probably wouldn't make a whole lot of sense when applied to, say, Google. Consider that nobody is (seriously) calling for a ban on Gmail, which is sustained by ads that rely on inspecting all user emails for keywords. If an ISP were to do this, it would be considered wiretapping (by many, at least). | |
-
|
