The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > The Internet

The Internet Web sites, web development, email, chat, bandwidth, the net and society

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-05-2018, 08:53 AM   #61
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 30,307
Here's your next so-called violation -- again, this is a practice entirely permitted under the old rules, so it's not exactly a net neutrality issue, but ye olde media are hyper focused on writing headlines that say it is.

YouTube, Netflix Videos Found to Be Slowed by Wireless Carriers

I'm super super happy that Verizon is performing this service for me, and you should probably be happy too, if your carrier is doing it for you.

My job in 2014-15 was supporting the transport of digital video. Ask me anything.
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2018, 09:57 AM   #62
tw
Read? I only know how to write.
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad View Post
Here's your next so-called violation -- [i]again, this is a practice entirely permitted under the old rules, so it's not exactly a net neutrality issue,
Under the old rules, Comcast was caught doing that, denied they were throttling web sites (ie Skype), was forced to admit to lying, and was force to stop selectively subverting internet traffic.

Under the new laws, that is now acceptable and encouraged behavior.

Their spokesman said, "Comcast does not block access to any applications, including BitTorrent."

Turns out they were throttling BitTorrent. And stopped in 2008 due to the old rules.

Previously successful attempts to destroy net neutrality mean consumers now only have a biopoly to choose from. Data transporters are now severely limiting net usage and increasing prices by even charging Skype for transporting Skype packets on their network. Even cell phone providers are now implementing surcharges and throttling. Consumer choices (free market competition) has been subverted.

Under the old rules, Comcast and Verizon would be forced to provide services found elsewhere for only $20 monthly. Free market competition is now all but eliminated.

We are the big internet provider. You will accept only what we decide you should have. Some people actually think that is good.
tw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2018, 10:31 AM   #63
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 30,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by tw View Post
Under the old rules, Comcast was caught doing that, denied they were throttling web sites (ie Skype)
Comcast throttled Bittorrent. They never throttled Skype. You think they did because that was the topic of a ten-year-old thread where you suggested that they were planning to throttle Skype. I firmly predicted they would not. I was right.
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2018, 08:22 PM   #64
tw
Read? I only know how to write.
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad View Post
Comcast throttled Bittorrent. They never throttled Skype. You think they did because that was the topic of a ten-year-old thread where you suggested that they were planning to throttle Skype.
You were wrong. IEEE Spectrum said they bought software to skew Skype packets - before they had throttled Bittorrent. I was right. You were wrong. Comcast denied they had bought the software. Skype demonstrated that Comcast was manipulating packets so that Skype connections were intermittent / interrupted.

Comcast was not the only one doing this. Most Persian Gulf nations also purchased the software to do same.

That is now acceptable under the new rules that say a data transporter can do anything they want. They can throttle packets from one company while not from others. They can skew packets to intentionally subvert or make unreliable communications from selected companies. And they can now deny they are doing it. All that and more is now legal.

Wacko Trump supporters say this is good. To them, this is called innovation.
tw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2018, 08:27 PM   #65
Dude111
An Awesome Dude
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad
There are no rules. There were some, but they were dropped. This led an entire set of people to say the sky would fall. You can't prove a negative, but so far the sky remains above.
Yes lets hope it does!!!
Dude111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2018, 08:54 PM   #66
sexobon
^it sings^
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,592
Seconded.
sexobon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2018, 09:48 PM   #67
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 30,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by tw View Post
Skype demonstrated that Comcast was manipulating packets so that Skype connections were intermittent / interrupted.
Please do bring us a link that says this happened.
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2018, 07:21 AM   #68
tw
Read? I only know how to write.
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,227
Comcast created it own VoIP service about the same time it was intentionally subvert P2P data transportation. Services such as Vonnage also noted intermittent data transport problems with their VoIP service.

From www.fudzilla.com on 20 Jan 2009:
Quote:
The US Federal Communications Commission has penned a stiff letter to Comcast over its system which gives its own Voice over IP service customers "special treatment" compared to competitors who use the ISP's network.

The Watchdog has asked Comcast to provide "a detailed justification for Comcast's disparate treatment of its own VoIP service as compared to that offered by other VoIP providers on its network." Comcast has been in the FCC's bad books since it started to throttle the traffic of P2P users. But when it came to look at the cable outfit's description of its throttling system it became alarmed at something else it spotted.

Apparently during times of actual network congestion Comcast will switch on its throttling software. Its rivals who are using its networks might experience slower webpage downloads, peer-to-peer upload takes somewhat longer to complete, or a VoIP call sounds choppy. However Comcast's own VoIP product, Comcast Digital Voice (CDV) apparently has a "separate facilities-based IP phone service" and "is not affected" by throttling software. The FCC wants to know how this is possible.
Comcast considers their own VoIP service as an information provider. So it was legally considered different from rules for data transporters. Comcast could maintain full service to their own VoIP while obstructing other VoIP services. A perfect example of why information providers must be separate from data transporters.

An internet provider once was required to transport all data without regard to content. Then innovation could happen. Information service providers were once considered a completely different service subject to different rules.

Without net neutrality, Comcast is free to subvert data packets from any competitor. And Trump supporters say this is good - inventing a lie that it will increase innovation.

We all have seen reduced competition due to attacks on net neutrality by Michael Powell during the George Jr administration. Now and again, a next wave of internet obstructions to innovation has begun.
tw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2018, 09:21 AM   #69
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 30,307
Swing and a miss. I'll try to make this entertaining and informative.

In 2009, there was a lot of network congestion. Comcast attempted to manage it with throttling.

But if they wanted to subvert Skype on a congested network, they wouldn't have had to. It's very simple. On a congested network, voice over Internet won't work.

Telephony is not real time, but very close to it. In general, internet voice connections (i.e., VoIP) are only possible where there is no network congestion. If there is congestion, it quickly starts to sound terrible. Doesn't take much to be unusable. Did you ever hear the person on the other end of the line sounding a little like an alien? That is VoIP with just a little congestion.

Most data doesn't mind if network packets are dropped, and retransmitted 100ms later out of order. But audio DOES mind!

In 2009, the Internet was not really VoIP-ready yet; and congestion caused all kinds of issues. VoIP was kind of sucky, no matter who your provider was. That's why the competition was "As Seen On TV" -- Vonage and Magic Jack.

But, at this very same time, Verizon was giving up on VoiP services. Well, dang! Why would they do that, if they knew they could just fuck up their competition? Fudzilla from Jan 2009: Verizon to shut down Internet phone service

Maybe they understood, even with shaping, they still only controlled their network; that means they controlled less than one half of the connection between the two sides of a VoIP conversation. And so it was impossible to guarantee quality of voice...

The FCC had means for concern here. But this doesn't mean Comcast was throttling VoiP specifically. And I'll wager anything they weren't, because -- it's very simple -- you wouldn't throttle Skype/VoIP in order to manage network congestion. You'd throttle services that were bandwidth-heavy. I have developed a table for our understanding:

HD video signal: 2,500,000 bits per second
SD video signal: 1,200,000 bits per second
VoIP signal: 12,000 bits per second

The FCC wanted to know how Comcast could provide quality voice during throttling. The story makes it clear. Comcast provided their own pipes to their own VoIP product. Their own network. Q.E.D. they weren't giving priority to their packets on the regular old network. They just built their own.
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2018, 10:06 AM   #70
tw
Read? I only know how to write.
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad View Post
Swing and a miss. I'll try to make this entertaining and informative.
The backbone (ie Level 3) had no congestion problems. Level 3 specifically cites the only reason for that congestion - a biopoly named Comcast. Comcast should have been upgrading their network. But that does not increase profits. So Comcast has congestion. A problem because they do not split up their 'one cable serving many customers' into 'two cables serving same customers with sufficient bandwidth'.

Again, $50+ for only 20 Mb. Korean has long provided 100 Mb for only $20 monthly.

Comcast is spending massively on buying NBC, a mobile phone company, the three tallest skyscrapers in Philadelphia, Universal Studios, and a large number of information providers. Done because they need not upgrade their 'last mile' equipment when extremists control the FCC. Comcast has virtually no competition since the last of the competitors are now gone. Comcast is now charging the information providers to pay for network upgrades that were once paid for by data transporter.

These innovations and upgrades would not be stifled with net neutrality. Embarrassing that UT cannot see it and supports the many who want to enrich the rich - extremists.

Again, backbone providers were quite blunt about where congestion exists. The last mile provider - Comcast - will not upgrade their hardware. Then uses destruction of net neutrality to mask and justify their 'we want to increase profits' actons.

Comcast subverted VoIP services while implementing their own that had no obstructions. Comcast expected to take over the VoIP business. When confronted by net neutrality, then VoIP could not destroy the competition. So Comcast move onto other ways to charge everyone more money - to increase profits without investing is capital equipment. (Give credit to Roberts for his constantly adapting strategies.)

Skype is now paying Comcast for hardware / software to upgrade Comcast reliability. Extremists say others (not Comcast) must pay for upgrades to the last mile as it is done in other nations (ie Korea).

I believe a Comcast upgrade, paid for by surcharging Skype, is currently ongoing in the Boston area. This will give Skype better reliability. And do nothing for the future, innovative, VoIP companies - who are now locked out of the market.

According to wacko extremists, that will somehow create innovation. In reality, Trump supporters hate free markets and innovation. And love the campaign contributions from a now richer Comcast. Extremist subvert net neutrality for political and monetary advantages. UT predictably recites their propaganda.

VoIP problems exist because Comcast will not upgrade (to increase profits) and even used selective throttling to get the information providers to pay for 'no throttling'. That cannot happen with net neutrality. Comcast would have to invest in their infrastructure - and not into big buildings, 21st Century Fox, Universal Studios, buy mobile phone companies, Liongate, NBC (and Telemundo), Spectacor, Dreamworks, et al. Two thirds of flights by Comcast's $40million private jet flights carry Brian Roberts (president) between his home and vacation sites.

Thanks to those who want to subvert net neutrality, we already have less competition and increasingly more expensive internet. So American internet is dropping on the list of 'best internet'. Thanks to destruction of net neutrality, America has dropped from #1 twenty years ago to somewhere around #10 - and still dropping. A drop that started with restriction to free market competition and the destruction of net neutrality - by same people who even lied about Saddam's WMDs, a military that is too small, Gestapo style torture, secret prisons, contempt of our allies, wiretapping without judicial oversight, Mission Accomplished, and mythical threats.

Last edited by tw; 09-06-2018 at 10:18 AM.
tw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2018, 10:37 AM   #71
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 30,307


You're so ridiculous!! It's 2018 now, and here's what happened while you were sleeping:

-- The NBC Universal buyout is complete and is 5 years old.

-- Since 2011, Skype is Microsoft.

-- Comcast HAS built out and no longer has the broad congestion issues they used to have.

But the rules still apply, except now we are watching even higher resolution video:

UHD video signal: 14,000,000 bits per second
HD video signal: 2,500,000 bits per second
SD video signal: 1,200,000 bits per second
VoIP signal: 12,000 bits per second

You can fit 1000 phone calls in one single 4K video stream. If you can stream video today, you have the minimum necessary for a decent voice experience.

For the last 10 years, the internet providers built out to the point where they can deliver you high def video. Because that is where the money is. Nobody is paying big money for voice.

That's why Comcast bought NBC/Universal and its intellectual property, which is mostly about video.
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2018, 08:44 PM   #72
tw
Read? I only know how to write.
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad View Post
You're so ridiculous!! It's 2018 now, and here's what happened while you were sleeping:
Now read what was posted. All those things fully apply to everything I had posted. You are again ignoring facts. Comcast is not investing in its infrastructure - then or today - as your post demonstrates. They have congestion when it is convenient. And are forcing information providers (Netflix, Skype, Bittorrent) to pay for upgrades to Comcast's network. Upgrades that will only benefit each big company who pays for those upgrades and at the expense of (diminished service to) others.

So much for equal access to all. An innovative VoIP (or other) service that cannot afford to pay Comcast to upgrade Comcast's network means stifled innovation. And then Comcast can increase their campaign contributions to extremists who hate net neutrality.

Comcast did not upgrade their network. With the destruction of net neutrality, Comcast can get others to pay for special treatment - at the expense of others. A total violation of what the internet and data transporters are about.

We are now watching higher resolution video. But Comcast is still using the same cable to service 120 or 200 customers when standard data rates now demand each cable serve only 60 or 40. Since Comcast stopped investing in infrastructure (to buy NBC, build the three tallest skyscrapers, buy cell phone companies), then congestion is only in the last mile - Comcast. Congestion is not in the backbone where companies are innovative and not running to extremists to subvert net neutrality.

Please stop being so dumb. Since I to can just as easily insult your stupidity. UT - stop being a wacko extremist. Start reading what is actually posted - not what your emotions want you to read. This was not the UT I knew many decades ago.

Stop being an adult acting like a child. Stick to the topic. Stop posting demeaning comments like an emotional wacko extremist (or UG). Then I will stop talking about your poor reading abilities and clearly diminished intelligence.

After so many personally demeaning comments from you, I will either talk about your intelligence, or will respond accordingly when you post like a moderate (an honest person).

Meanwhile net neutrality is what made all equal on the internet. And why internet companies invest in their infrastructure. That made innovation possible. Destruction of net neutrality means big advantages for the few - like Brian Roberts whose $40 million per year corporate airplanes have become his personal vehicles. More money that is not going into infrastructure. Since Comcast no longer has serious competition due to destruction of net neutrality.

Last edited by tw; 09-06-2018 at 08:53 PM.
tw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2018, 09:59 PM   #73
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 30,307
Provide the link I asked for, proof of what you claimed: a link to a story that actually shows, doesn't just suggest, that Skype demonstrated that Comcast was manipulating packets so that Skype connections were intermittent / interrupted.

One link.

Don't change the subject.

Don't talk about me.

Don't talk about emotions.

Don't write a paragraph. Don't write five paragraphs.

Just provide the link.
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2018, 10:20 PM   #74
sexobon
^it sings^
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by tw View Post
Now read what was posted. All those things fully apply to everything I had posted. You are again ignoring facts. ...

… Please stop being so dumb. Since I to can just as easily insult your stupidity. UT - stop being a wacko extremist. Start reading what is actually posted - not what your emotions want you to read. This was not the UT I knew many decades ago.

Stop being an adult acting like a child. Stick to the topic. Stop posting demeaning comments like an emotional wacko extremist (or UG). Then I will stop talking about your poor reading abilities and clearly diminished intelligence.

After so many personally demeaning comments from you, I will either talk about your intelligence, or will respond accordingly when you post like a moderate (an honest person). ...
[cross threading] UT, have you been smoking cesium again? [/cross threading]

Quote:
Originally Posted by tw View Post
… This was not the UT I knew many decades ago. ..
UT ... tw is your father.


sexobon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2018, 01:19 AM   #75
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 67,194
What bothers me most is in that vote the government has given up all control except the truth in advertising by I think the Commerce Dept?

Does this mean cities are now allowed to build their own high speed networks?

I have a choice of Comcast, Verizon, or super zoomy Verizon Fios. They are all out there on the pole. They ain't cheap.
One package I had contained 128 channels I was paying for, that were religion, or in a foreign language. But I had to buy them to get what I really wanted.

I also have to pay a surcharge for "local sports" every month. I don't play, watch, or give a rats ass about local sports. Buy I have no choice if I want internet TV.

So all my bitches are small potatoes. The real problem is friends out in Lancaster and Lebanon Counties, oh, and Griff, can't get internet with any speed from anyone at any price.
The population density isn't worth the expense of the necessary infrastructure. So companies like Frontier just milk the captive public for what the can get with minimum investment.
Sure, places like Japan and Korea have much faster net but look at the population density there. That makes a lower investment for the results.

My grandparents lived on a dirt road only 13 miles from the third largest city in MA. Yet they didn't get a phone until 1939, and electricity until 1949. The density didn't justify the investment until the utilities got pushed by the government.

Somebody is spending, I wonder if it's in the right place. Right place for profit I guess.
Attached Images
 
__________________
Everything is interesting... look closer.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:45 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.