Net neutrality update

[Undertoad]

Correct! Comcast throttled BitTorrent, which congested its networks in 2012, making it harder to provide other services. That is the biggest example of an ACTUAL net neutrality violation in history.

But nowhere, in all that bluster, is a link to say Comcast was subverting VOICE traffic.

The software they may have bought (all this is from a lone press release from the company trying to sell them software) was for VOICE traffic, not BitTorrent. But we have no evidence they actually bought it, and no evidence they ever subverted voice traffic.

Understand this: it is utterly utterly trivial to detect throttling with packet sniffing software.

But evidence is not your strong suit. I ask for simple evidence, easy to provide. You just go off on a pathetic rant, believing that somehow that is evidence.

So: another failure, and no money for your charities.

How many times are you going to misremember this information?

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

But nowhere, in all that bluster, is a link to say Comcast was subverting VOICE traffic.

IEEE said Comcast (and others) bought software to subvert VoIP traffic. Comcast bought software but did not use it? Then Skype, et al traffic was suffering quality and connection problems - intermittently but Comcast was not using it. UT knows Comcast does not subvert net neutrality even after caught subverting other traffic.

Voice over IP is not the entire internet. Net Neutrality means all internet functions work properly. Data transporters only transport all data. Content providers remains a separate industry to only provide that data. Then free market competition exists.

Once a company is both data transporter and content provider, then obvious conflicts of interest exist. Free market is compromised. Shenanigans such as packet skewing and data throttling mysteriously happen - and have happened. Net neutrality must be destroyed to make those shenanigans possible and more profitable.

Is net neutrality being subverted? Yes. Does that mean already obscene profits by the data transporters can be even greater. Of course. Is free market competition created by net neutrality. Obviously. Is that free market being subverted by duopolies? Obviously.

UT argues one tiny aspect - VoIP. If only VoIP packets are not being skewed, then net neutrality is not under attack and free markets exist? Nonsense. Right wing extremists (ie Fox News) are openly advocating the destruction of net neutrality and free markets. (Probably because Clinton successfully created it.) UT says that is good because VoIP (temporarily) is probably and currently not being subverted. UT then advocates removal of regulations that stopped VoIP skewing.

Wacko extremist logic is at play. Duopolies are a first step in destruction of net neutrality so that resulting monopolistic policies slowly can be implemented. Already, content providers will be charged for infrastructure that data transporters are suppose to invest in. UT says that is good - because subverting VoIP packets does not always happen.

Step one. Use propaganda to tell extremists what to believe. Net Neutrality was created by Clinton. So it must be evil. Fox News said so. Fox News disciples such as UT know it must be true. Learning facts before having a conclusion is not his strong suit.

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by tw

IEEE said Comcast (and others) bought software to subvert VoIP traffic. Comcast bought software but did not use it?

I found the 2006 (!) post where you pointed out the IEEE article

The article points out that Comcast was "a customer" of Narus, the network management company that build VoIP-subverting software. But Narus built a lot of network management software.

The article points out that Narus's software can "secure, analyze, monitor, and mediate any traffic in an IP network" and that "Comcast Corp., in Philadelphia, the country's largest cable company, is already a Narus customer; Narus declined to say whether Comcast uses the VoIP-blocking capabilities."

Which is normal. You don't disclose your customer's interests. This tells us nothing; Comcast bought software that did 100 things, and one of the 100 things was the capability to subvert voice traffic. Big deal. We would need to show they were using it.

But again, that is utterly simple. I've personally done that kind of debugging for Fax over IP calls, at my last job.

All the VoIP providers would have an interest in finding and showing this subversion. It was very much in their interests to do so, in the first rounds of net neutrality discussions. They DID find it at another, smaller ISP. They DID NOT find it at Comcast.

UT knows Comcast does not subvert net neutrality even after caught subverting other traffic.

It was trivial to show that other traffic was subverted. It would have been easy to show that VoIP traffic was subverted. But you can't find a link for that, even when provided a large motivation.

No money for you. 13 years of not being able to prove this. How long are you going to repeat your lie?