<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
Re. net neutrality, from a client of mine who runs a secure network:<br>
<br>
There was recently a TV broadcast or two, interviewing various
people who are involved in the policy debate and responses to it. <br>
<br>
One was the person who wrote the brief to the FCC, that opposed net
neutrality in the form that existed until just recently. You would
be tempted to think of him as The Badguy, but that would be
mistaken. He said that his underlying reasoning was that the
existing regulatory regime was a patchwork of nonsense, and what's
needed is to regulate these companies as "telecommunications
services" rather than as "information services." That is, AT&T
and Comcast aren't just the equivalent of movie studios and
publishers, they own the infrastructure and wires over which the
information is delivered, and the ownership of the wires should be
legally determinative. <br>
<br>
This position, to re-classify AT&T and Comcast as
"telecommunications services," has become known as "the nuclear
option" because it would impose absolute net neutrality without need
of a regulatory Rube Goldberg contraption that could be subverted.<br>
<br>
The other was a high-up at Google. I've made no secret of my
dislike of Google ("a surveillance-monster on a scale that makes NSA
look like a pussycat"), but this time it appears they might do some
good. The Google legal guy was asked if he would be seeking FCC to
restore the previous regulations. In reply he said something that
my client interpreted as implying that Google was going to go for
the nuclear option. <br>
<br>
So if Google and a few other biggies do indeed go for the nuclear
option, we may see the return of iron-clad net neutrality that
leaves no wiggle-room for AT&T and Comcast to interfere with
others' services and content on their network. Though, we should
still be pushing a hardcore grassroots agenda here, so we don't just
end up with another set of biggies carving up the pie and leaving us
with crumbs. <br>
<br>
Ultimately the solution is to separate "carriers" from "content."
Comcast and AT&T should be treated as common carriers that can
have no role in producing content for their networks. Each would be
divested of its content-related elements in much the same way as the
Bell System regulated telephone monopoly was broken up decades ago.
Ironically, the breakup of Bell is what led directly to the present
state of affairs where carriers can call themselves "information
services" and censor their networks. But perhaps, as with Pandora's
Box, there's "Hope" at the bottom of that chest full of plagues. <br>
<br>
-G.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
=======<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 14-01-17-Fri 8:59 PM, Romy Ilano
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAFqWQB8_MpOagymRD+A82QrPG+mhGh2_BXox4OmbtiM0397atA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Realistically I think the only way to get net neturality
back is some kind of alliance of powerful corporate start-ups
like Google + NetFlix + Amazon (especially since Amazon has
Amazon Prime instant video + AWS). <br>
<br>
I know that Google is pro net neutrality but I'm surprised
they weren't able to push back. Seeing as how money is what
makes these kinds of things talk, what went wrong? Was
something just not organized properly in this battle?<br>
<br>
</div>
South Korea, which is years ahead of us in terms of
infrastructure with its net etc. has already been facing issues
when its net neutrality was struck down a few years ago, and
ISPs were allowed to block VoIP services like Kakao Talk.<br>
<br>
They're running into conflicts over Smart TV - I feel that just
like their gaming industry, maybe this is our future. Maybe
there just needs to be a stronger corporate coalition. <br>
<div><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://gigaom.com/2012/02/10/smart-tvs-cause-a-net-neutrality-debate-in-s-korea/">http://gigaom.com/2012/02/10/smart-tvs-cause-a-net-neutrality-debate-in-s-korea/</a><br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all">
<div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>=============================</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Romy Ilano</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:romy@snowyla.com" target="_blank">romy@snowyla.com</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Hol
Gaskill <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:hol@gaskill.com" target="_blank">hol@gaskill.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
attached is an interesting/frightening graphic that's been
making the rounds. per info from jenny, sudo mesh has so
far been able to foil google's attempts to pull information
but i'm not sure how that applies to ISPs' practice of
performing deep packet inspection. I think getting
behind/setting up tor nodes will help slow them down but it
will be an arms race as long as we have an oligopoly on
internet connectivity. any other ideas? also if anyone has
advice on setting up a tor exit node, I'm trying to set up a
home file server this weekend and would like to start
experimenting. if htere is a server just sitting at sudo
room, i'd be glad to borrow it and run an exit node, maybe
host some stuff for people.<br>
<br>
cheers<br>
<div>
<div class="h5"><br>
<br>
Jan 14, 2014 07:36:07 PM, <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:romy@snowyla.com">romy@snowyla.com</a>
wrote:<br>
yowsers!<br>
><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/15/technology/appeals-court-rejects-fcc-rules-on-internet-service-providers.html"
target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/15/technology/appeals-court-rejects-fcc-rules-on-internet-service-providers.html</a><br>
<br>
><br>
>Would SudoMesh mitigate the ill effects of the
disappearance of net neutrality?<br>
><br>
>=============================<br>
>Romy Ilano<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:romy@snowyla.com">romy@snowyla.com</a><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
><br>
</div>
</div>
>_______________________________________________<br>
>sudo-discuss mailing list<br>
><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org">sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org</a><br>
><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss"
target="_blank">http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss</a><br>
></blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org">sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss">http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>