 
Xizer
join:2004-02-05
New York, NY
2 edits |  This is not because of "child porn"
Time Warner is not doing this out of concern for "the children." It looks like they've finally found an excuse to get rid of their top-notch Usenet service. This is a red herring. The only reason they are doing this is to save themselves money so that they no longer have to pay for their customers to have access to Usenet. As of June 23rd, they are ending their complimentary Usenet access for all of their subscribers.
Time Warner Cable has, up until now, offered Usenet service that is outsourced to Newshosting. All TWC customers have had access to 110-day retention, unlimited bandwidth binary newsgroups. This has been a fairly well kept secret. It doesn't surprise me that they have now found an excuse to get rid of this surprising value (this kind of service is around $20/month from a third party Usenet provider, normally). Time Warner Cable has long been a top ISP in the United States for this, liberal bandwidth policies, and good speeds compared the competition. This is but another step in many that Time Warner is taking to increase their already impressive profits at the expense of the consumer. It seems that Time Warner is joining their Comcast buddies in trying to nickel and dime the consumer, while removing as much value as possible from their product.
Hey, Time Warner: Thanks for getting rid of my Usenet access. Now where the hell is my $20/month cheaper service?
I know I'm already gearing up to switch over to the competition. The day Time Warner starts rolling out those ridiculous 40 GB bandwidth caps that they've been trialing in Texas is the day that I cancel my service with them. Why, when they are faced with increasing competition from Verizon's FIOS and AT&T's U-Verse, they are pulling this crap is beyond me.
I don't know about Sprint and Verizon, but I suspect they are also doing this to save themselves some dough, and latching onto the pathetic "child porn" reason as an excuse as well. | |
|
 | |
| | 
mod_wastrel
join:2008-03-28
 ·magicjack.com
| Re: This is not because of "child porn" said by Dogfather  :...this has ZERO to do with pr0n "Child porn" has ZERO to do with porn. Child abuse is not porn. | |
|
| 
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
| said by Xizer :Quit inaccurately reporting this story. Time Warner is not doing this out of concern for "the children." It looks like they've finally found an excuse to get rid of their top-notch Usenet service. This is a red herring. The only reason they are doing this is to save themselves money so that they no longer have to pay for their customers to have access to Usenet Hummm...interesting 
--
Religion does three things quite effectively: Divides people, Controls people, Deludes people. | |
|
| 
Matt
Quitting Caffeine - Argh
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
 ·North State Commun..
| said by Xizer :All TWC customers have had access to 110-day retention, unlimited bandwidth binary newsgroups. Wow, wonder what you use THAT for?  | |
|
| |
Xizer
join:2004-02-05
New York, NY
| Re: This is not because of "child porn" said by Matt :said by Xizer :All TWC customers have had access to 110-day retention, unlimited bandwidth binary newsgroups. Wow, wonder what you use THAT for? Probably not child porn, since I'd imagine some guy filming such depraved acts in the back of a shed isn't using a video camera in a high enough quality that it would require such high bandwidth. | |
|
| | |
Matt
Quitting Caffeine - Argh
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Re: This is not because of "child porn" said by Xizer :said by Matt :said by Xizer :All TWC customers have had access to 110-day retention, unlimited bandwidth binary newsgroups. Wow, wonder what you use THAT for? Probably not child porn, since I'd imagine some guy filming such depraved acts in the back of a shed isn't using a video camera in a high enough quality that it would require such high bandwidth. Right, but piracy and child porn are both crimes. | |
|
| | | | 
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Re: This is not because of "child porn" So is bribing politicians to get laws passed that are favorable to your industry. | |
|
| | | | | |
| | | |
Xizer
join:2004-02-05
New York, NY
1 edit | said by Matt :Right, but piracy and child porn are both crimes. The difference is that one of those "crimes" actually deserves to be a crime, whereas the other one is widely considered to be acceptable, just like jaywalking. | |
|
| | | | |
Matt
Quitting Caffeine - Argh
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Re: This is not because of "child porn" said by Xizer :said by Matt :Right, but piracy and child porn are both crimes. The difference is that one of those "crimes" actually deserves to be a crime, whereas the other one is widely considered to be acceptable, just like jaywalking. That doesn't change the fact it's still a crime, no matter how much you want it to not be. | |
|
| | | | | | 
major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA
clubs:
| Re: This is not because of "child porn" said by Matt :said by Xizer :said by Matt :Right, but piracy and child porn are both crimes. The difference is that one of those "crimes" actually deserves to be a crime, whereas the other one is widely considered to be acceptable, just like jaywalking. That doesn't change the fact it's still a crime, no matter how much you want it to not be. And it also doesn't change the fact that at any given time, DMCA takedown notices issued for alleged copyright infringement are bogus. So put that in your piracy catch-all bong and smoke it.
--
The Toll
Tracking Lord Stanley
| |
|
| | | | | | |
Matt
Quitting Caffeine - Argh
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Re: This is not because of "child porn" Who is talking about DMCA takedown notices? The last time I checked, NNTP wasn't peer-to-peer. | |
|
| | | | | | | |
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Re: This is not because of "child porn" So what. Take down notices aren't limited to P2P. You can obviously get DMCA notices for posting to Usenet. | |
|
| | | | | | | |
major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA
clubs:
| said by Matt :Who is talking about DMCA takedown notices? The last time I checked, NNTP wasn't peer-to-peer. Context of the comment notwithstanding, which should have clarified it for you beyond all doubt, you made one of your ubiquitous all downloading is piracy statements and I corrected you. | |
|
| | | | | |
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | So what if it's a crime. Spend enough money and you can get virtually anything criminalized or decriminalized.
Laws like the DMCA and NET were BOUGHT. | |
|
| | | | | |
mod_wastrel
join:2008-03-28
·magicjack.com
| Slavery used to be legal, so I guess the fact that it wasn't a crime made it OK. Women not being able to vote used to be legal... OK? Being a "crime" has little to do with something being "acceptable" or not; it's about a small group of individuals getting together and wanting to exert control over others... for the sake of the common good, of course... certainly not for some lobbyist with the most money, certainly not because they have such higher moral values (what's the ratio of legislators in jail versus non-legislators?). Oh, yeah, something being a crime or not is all that matters for it to be considered unacceptable. | |
|
| | | | | | | 
bubbabuddha
@verizon.net
| Re: This is not because of "child porn" Juries ended slavery in the north by refusing to convict, which should be the case with piracy or even drugs. Juries need to step up and tell the system what maybe acceptable if the politicians are bought and paid for. go to FUlly Informed Jury Association. | |
|
|
disconnected
@snet.net
| Another problem is that if you take away the 'goods' from the perverts, then, instead of privately enjoying their perversion in front of the computer screen, they may find no alternative but to step into the real world and perhaps hurt a real child instead of a virtual child.
Every time the government tries to 'fix' a problem, it creates at least three more. | |
|
graysonf
Premium,MVM
join:1999-07-16
Fort Lauderdale, FL
| Cat and mouse game. All Usenet content, illicit or otherwise, is completely portable. Closing off individual newsgroups accomplishes nothing. Those posting and seeking that content will just invade other newsgroups, and when those are dropped, they'll move on to others. This has been going on since the beginning. | |
|
| 
Voyager2K2
join:2001-10-04
Wayne, PA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Cat and mouse game. Well yes and no.
Having been around the Usenet a long,long time,individual groups tend to police themselves on content.
There are ways of poisoning posts and please don't ask how.
Another big problem is kiddy pr0n is not illegal all over the world. Morally it's disgusting to just about everyone but some countries (France comes to mind) have very relaxed laws.
Yes those scum will just keep moving to vacant groups but hopefully they will not attract new scum by being underground. Only premium providers carry such groups BTW.
Any law enforcement armed with a subpoena can nab a poster from the US with a little effort IMHO. Credit card trails are way easier to follow than dealing with an ISP. | |
|
mod_wastrel
join:2008-03-28 | Obvious much? "...the Washington Post explores the idea that the effort may actually make the problem worse, by pushing it underground where such operations and users are harder to track." Duh. | |
|
| |
| | jarthur31
join:2006-04-14
Carlsbad, NM | Re: Obvious much? Now there's common sense politicians will never grasp!!! | |
|
|
| avin
Harbinger of Doom
join:2005-02-04
Brampton, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Velcom
| Re: How about this? said by acadiel :Parents, watch our kids and supervise their Internet activities. Get filtering software and make sure you know what they're doing and where they're going on the net. Better yet, lock down what they can visit and keep tabs on who they're e-mailing! why? are the kids watching child porn?
yes yes.. i know what you mean | |
|
yebabyeeee
@comcast.net
 from:
amartinas
| More to it This is one of the first stepping stones to limiting freedom on the internet. If this model works, it will be applied to other net content that is deemed dark and devious. | |
|
User1
@comcast.net
from:
Edge1
| Ummmm I'm not sure if this is reasonable, but wouldn't it make more sense for the feds to go after the people uploading the offensive material instead of TWC and the like taking all newsgroups access away? Just a thought. But then they'd have to still give nntp access to their customers. | |
|
| 
Edge1
Workin' Ta Live
join:2006-03-01
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Ummmm Sure sounds reasonable to me. They can go after uploaders posting this slime...take it away and they (law enforcement) will just be that much further behind. You're totally right - removing one of the depraved end-user/scumbag/voyeur's access is hardly attacking the real problem of actual abuse.
As others have mentioned this does strike me as more empty "feel good" knee-jerk BS rhetoric from a politician...which sounds good to Joe Sixpack and also happens to align nicely with ISP financial incentives. Politicians . | |
|
MTU
Premium
join:2005-02-15
San Luis Obispo, CA
·AT&T Yahoo
| Make it worse Porn of all types and extremes was around long before the internet and will be long after. The sex drive, in all it's bizarre variations, is the strongest motivator in human-kind.
The internet has provided and 'easy' way for law enforcement to show results (from the viewpoint of a retired 30-year PD investigator). Gee whiz, if a TV show can nab pedophiles, anyone can.
Going after the usenet access has more to do with what's popular 'politically', and, as mentioned elsewhere, for the 'convenience' (cost savings) of net providers.
Now these nasty people will be 'forced' to not be as lazy and to learn how to encrypt.
They might even go back to sending letters to each other or meeting in airport bathrooms. | |
|
|
P Ness
You'Ve Forgotten 9-11 Already
Premium
join:2001-08-29
Cromwell, CT
clubs:
| Another thing to protect the children..Pfft THINK OF THE CHILDREN.
hell they cannot even be 100% clear on what child pron even is anymore. Another thing that will just be abused!
still remember that case where a web site was put up for a bunch of young pre teen models...of course they were hardly models but they were NEVER naked...
he was charged and is spending 3 years in jail because the kids we in so called "lude/provicative" positions.
..and yet its ok to take Lude pictures of hanana montana and no one goes to jail...LAWL
--
www.stopfcc.comI do not think the government needs to restrict free speech especially on a device that has an off knob. | |
|
|
|
|
Does NY Anti-Child Porn Effort Make Problem Worse?
·
How about this?