Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh
You say "pedantic", I say "factual".... 
You state that no one "is or can be silenced on the internet at present" - does that apply to newspapers' web sites, or forums like this, as I think you may find that we can be "silenced" if we break the law, or libel (or allow our members to libel) someone. |
If you have a message to get out, you can do so now to the whole world, anonymously; which for some people is equivalent to safely. Individual websites can be 'silenced', obviously, but because of the nature of the web at present, that would not be of any effect in censoring what people might need to say.
Are you unable to address why you think Egypt felt the need to take it down completely?
Quote:
|
You also state that that it is "not something which should have ANY restrictions imposed upon it" - how about bandwidth restrictions due to geographic/technology limitations, how about legal restrictions such a copyright/libel/criminal acts, and how about the basic economic restriction that it all has to be built and paid for the [...] technology stack and fibre that is the backbone of the internet?
|
If they have oversubscribed their hardware, they better be ready to compensate those who aren't receiving the advertised service. I'm happy to accept contention ratios and 95th percentiles, as long as I'm told about them up front.
---------- Post added at 11:39 ---------- Previous post was at 11:34 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignitionnet
Traffic has been shaped on public networks for over a decade and that hasn't happened yet. That's just considering hardware appliances, it's of course perfectly feasible to deprioritise by having certain destinations you don't like very much crammed together on cheap congested transit and give uncongested connectivity to others.
ISPs are perfectly allowed to inspect traffic in an automated fashion for network management purposes without losing common carrier protection or violating privacy - see RIPA for more details.
|
I know it has happened for a long time already, but I think you'll agree it is a much hotter topic now, hence this thread. It's this "you don't like very much" aspect of the traffic management which is wrong. Why should any one person be allowed to make that decision? How can they claim to represent the wishes of all the owners of the traffic?
ISPs may be allowed under the pretense they wouldn't be able to afford to do it on a big brother scale. I'd like to clearly state just because RIPA allows it, it most definitely does not mean it's right or A Good Idea.