Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(PCWorld)   If you're on Verizon, you may be Farking on borrowed time   (pcworld.com) divider line 67
    More: Scary, Verizon, public switched telephone network, internet service provider  
•       •       •

8392 clicks; posted to Geek » on 10 Sep 2013 at 11:55 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



67 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-10 11:23:50 AM  
Net Neutrality:  This Is Why
 
2013-09-10 11:36:31 AM  
Won't stop at Verizon. Not even close.
 
2013-09-10 11:40:12 AM  
Well, you won't be as likely to run over your data limit when there's nothing to see or do

/so there's that
 
2013-09-10 11:44:16 AM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Well, you won't be as likely to run over your data limit when there's nothing to see or do

/so there's that


This is quite possibly the means by which these companies get around net neutrality.  They'll exempt some sites from racking up data useage. My words. Mark them.
 
2013-09-10 11:48:05 AM  
If this is true, then f*ck you Verizon.
 
2013-09-10 11:53:58 AM  
If Verizon ultimately wins, expect then the rules are invalidated and every ISP is free to shape traffic.
 
2013-09-10 11:58:36 AM  
Thank you, Al Franken.
 
2013-09-10 12:00:03 PM  
Aw hell naw.
 
2013-09-10 12:02:37 PM  
Help me, Google Fiber-wan Kenobi! You're my only hope.
 
2013-09-10 12:03:46 PM  
Maybe one of Verizon's lawyers can explain this to me:

Verizon offers FIOS, which provides both TV and internet service. For their TV service, they (as the carrier) pay carriage fees to the content providers for the right to offer that content to their subscribers. But now, for their internet service (which arrives over the exact same infrastructure as the TV service), they state that the content providers are supposed to pay carriage fees to the carrier for the right to be carried.

And what about a company like Netflix? They produce original content equivalent to that of other content providers who receive carriage fees from Verizon. If Netflix has to pay a fee to Verizon for carriage of data over Verizon's network, then Verizon should have to pay carriage fees to Netflix for the right to stream Netflix original content.
 
2013-09-10 12:07:41 PM  

Cybernetic: Maybe one of Verizon's lawyers can explain this to me:

Verizon offers FIOS, which provides both TV and internet service. For their TV service, they (as the carrier) pay carriage fees to the content providers for the right to offer that content to their subscribers. But now, for their internet service (which arrives over the exact same infrastructure as the TV service), they state that the content providers are supposed to pay carriage fees to the carrier for the right to be carried.

And what about a company like Netflix? They produce original content equivalent to that of other content providers who receive carriage fees from Verizon. If Netflix has to pay a fee to Verizon for carriage of data over Verizon's network, then Verizon should have to pay carriage fees to Netflix for the right to stream Netflix original content.


It's very simple.

FU pay me.
 
2013-09-10 12:10:40 PM  
This is a non-issue. If Verizon starts dicking me over on my internet traffic I'll just resort to the free market and patronize one of their competitors who doesn't.
 
2013-09-10 12:11:01 PM  
I'd love to have my internet experience curated by well monied twits bent on obtaining more money.

"Google didn't pay up, you can't use their email anymore. A Verizon address is quite prestigious though."
 
2013-09-10 12:17:00 PM  
so the post office should be able to charge me for getting mail?
I should have to pay everytime a tele-marketer calls me?
The highway should be able to charge me for getting off a toll road
The bus line should be able to charge a store for delivering me to the store.
Delta should be able to charge Disney World for flying me to Orlando
Nissan Should be able to charge McDonalds for enabling me to go through the drive through
the possibilities are endless.
 
2013-09-10 12:17:21 PM  

RexTalionis: If Verizon ultimately wins, expect then the rules are invalidated and every ISP is free to shape traffic.


ISPs technically already shape traffic. They have QOS setup so you do not have your entire bandwidth used up for torrenting, video services etc. This is done to make sure the network works for all the customers, including the ones who pay for guaranteed bandwidth. While they are not setting up ACLs or or parameters to block you from getting access to a website, or anything else (since those use almost no bandwidth), they shape other bandwidth intensive traffic to make sure you can get to point x or y.

Hopefully Verizon does not win this, cause in the end everyone will lose.
 
2013-09-10 12:18:00 PM  
Verizon Wireless now offers you to view Verizon websites at 200% normal speed!

Competitor websites are now viewed at 25% of offered speed
 
2013-09-10 12:22:43 PM  
I work for a little telecom called RCN.  Freaking love that place... full net neutrality, we don't throttle your traffic, and we don't do "traffic shaping", either.  If you pay for a 25Mbps connection, you can run that bastard at 100% all day, every day, and we won't even bat an eye.  I still chuckle when someone needs to have a modem reprovisioned, and they're worried I'll realize they're torrenting stuff.  We don't care.  You pay for the bandwidth, you get that bandwidth.  What you do with it is on you.
 
2013-09-10 12:24:11 PM  
Some guy in coveralls emerges from Mae East saying "Can you hear me now?". A guy in a monkey suit drives by. He spots the guy in the coveralls and exclaims "Verizon? There goes the Internet!". Because telecoms haven't gotten massive government help over the years.
 
2013-09-10 12:26:00 PM  
Then why am I paying for bandwidth, if I'm not entitled to use it as I please?
 
2013-09-10 12:28:03 PM  

Wellon Dowd: This is a non-issue. If Verizon starts dicking me over on my internet traffic I'll just resort to the free market and patronize one of their competitors who doesn't.


Yes, because there are no cartels in the Free MarketTM.
 
2013-09-10 12:37:12 PM  

Cpl.D: I work for a little telecom called RCN.  Freaking love that place... full net neutrality, we don't throttle your traffic, and we don't do "traffic shaping", either.  If you pay for a 25Mbps connection, you can run that bastard at 100% all day, every day, and we won't even bat an eye.  I still chuckle when someone needs to have a modem reprovisioned, and they're worried I'll realize they're torrenting stuff.  We don't care.  You pay for the bandwidth, you get that bandwidth.  What you do with it is on you.


Yeah, RCN is awesome. Had it for three years and there's none of the BS I used to put up with from Charter or Comcast.
 
2013-09-10 12:49:37 PM  
Folks, there is evil out there. And it exists largely in the corporations that control the government that makes the rules those corporations have to follow.

We're farked.
 
2013-09-10 01:01:52 PM  

Cpl.D: I work for a little telecom called RCN.  Freaking love that place... full net neutrality, we don't throttle your traffic, and we don't do "traffic shaping", either.  If you pay for a 25Mbps connection, you can run that bastard at 100% all day, every day, and we won't even bat an eye.  I still chuckle when someone needs to have a modem reprovisioned, and they're worried I'll realize they're torrenting stuff.  We don't care.  You pay for the bandwidth, you get that bandwidth.  What you do with it is on you.


Do you mind expanding into NJ?
 
2013-09-10 01:18:55 PM  

Wellon Dowd: This is a non-issue. If Verizon starts dicking me over on my internet traffic I'll just resort to the free market and patronize one of their competitors who doesn't.


If they win, you can bet your ass their competitors will follow suit. With quickness.


Verizon Communications should be able to block its broadband customers from going to websites that refuse to pay the provider to deliver their traffic, a lawyer for Verizon told an appeals court Monday.

fark you and horse you rode in on, buddy.
 
2013-09-10 01:44:54 PM  

Tricky Chicken: so the post office should be able to charge me for getting mail?

Ever notice rising prices in stamps?
I should have to pay everytime a tele-marketer calls me?  Well, you do pay to use your phone.
The highway should be able to charge me for getting off a toll road Ever try to get out of New Jersey?
The bus line should be able to charge a store for delivering me to the store.  Did you think that bus stop sign in front of the Eat-N-Purge is free?
Delta should be able to charge Disney World for flying me to Orlando There's this thing called "vacation packages ..."
Nissan Should be able to charge McDonalds for enabling me to go through the drive through  McDonald's charges Nissan if they want to advertise with them.
the possibilities are endless.  Have been going on unabated for the past 50 years.

FTFY
 
2013-09-10 01:47:52 PM  

SDRR: Wellon Dowd: This is a non-issue. If Verizon starts dicking me over on my internet traffic I'll just resort to the free market and patronize one of their competitors who doesn't.

If they win, you can bet your ass their competitors will follow suit. With quickness.


Verizon Communications should be able to block its broadband customers from going to websites that refuse to pay the provider to deliver their traffic, a lawyer for Verizon told an appeals court Monday.

fark you and horse you rode in on, buddy.


Pretty much this. Can anyone explain what value is added in websites having to pay a toll to your ISP for them to connect to you on top of the toll you have to pay to see them? It's not like the ISP has to do extra work to add websites to their network. The ISPs are middle men who want make more work for themselves in blocking content to extract even larger profits.
 
2013-09-10 01:49:15 PM  
Verizon Communications should be able to block its broadband customers from going to websites that refuse to pay the provider to deliver their traffic, a lawyer for Verizon told an appeals court Monday.

My, what a very polite form of blackmail that is.
 
2013-09-10 01:51:06 PM  
I'm not well versed in this so correct me if I'm wrong, but won't they lose common carrier status if they start doing this? Meaning they'll then be responsible for content going over their network?

The counter to this stupidity of course is brain dead notices. If 20 million verizon customers got to google and it said: "Verizon is charging us to allow you to visit our search engine. Please pay us so we can pay them or phone them at ### to complain" that policy would change real quick.
 
2013-09-10 01:52:04 PM  

Gaddiel: Cpl.D: I work for a little telecom called RCN.  Freaking love that place... full net neutrality, we don't throttle your traffic, and we don't do "traffic shaping", either.  If you pay for a 25Mbps connection, you can run that bastard at 100% all day, every day, and we won't even bat an eye.  I still chuckle when someone needs to have a modem reprovisioned, and they're worried I'll realize they're torrenting stuff.  We don't care.  You pay for the bandwidth, you get that bandwidth.  What you do with it is on you.

Do you mind expanding into NJ?


...and CT? I'd really like an option other than Bombast and U-suck.
 
2013-09-10 01:58:06 PM  

Cpl.D: I work for a little telecom called RCN. Freaking love that place... full net neutrality, we don't throttle your traffic, and we don't do "traffic shaping", either. If you pay for a 25Mbps connection, you can run that bastard at 100% all day, every day, and we won't even bat an eye. I still chuckle when someone needs to have a modem reprovisioned, and they're worried I'll realize they're torrenting stuff. We don't care. You pay for the bandwidth, you get that bandwidth. What you do with it is on you.


Your cable channel lineup needs help, though.  The handful of channels that I really want, i.e. Discovery Science, History International and the Military Channel, are all on the highest tier.  That sucks.
 
2013-09-10 01:58:43 PM  

Night Night Cream Puff: Gaddiel: Cpl.D: I work for a little telecom called RCN.  Freaking love that place... full net neutrality, we don't throttle your traffic, and we don't do "traffic shaping", either.  If you pay for a 25Mbps connection, you can run that bastard at 100% all day, every day, and we won't even bat an eye.  I still chuckle when someone needs to have a modem reprovisioned, and they're worried I'll realize they're torrenting stuff.  We don't care.  You pay for the bandwidth, you get that bandwidth.  What you do with it is on you.

Do you mind expanding into NJ?

...and CT? I'd really like an option other than Bombast and U-suck.


I'm in CT and I have Optimum. Totally sweet - I get around 60mbps down and 20 mbps up.
 
2013-09-10 02:01:59 PM  
I don't get it, you are already paying Verizon for your data.
 
2013-09-10 02:08:18 PM  

KarmicDisaster: I don't get it, you are already paying Verizon for your data.


Yes. They want the data owners to pay for the opportunity to have an audience for their data (and accompanying advertisements) too. That's the whole reason ISPs hate Net Neutrality, because it doesn't allow them to discriminate due to content so they can use monopsony power to keep websites from getting hits unless they are willing to pay the ISP for the opportunity to get those hits.
 
2013-09-10 02:10:17 PM  

KarmicDisaster: I don't get it, you are already paying Verizon for your data.


Exactly.  It doesn't cost them any more to send 1 gb of data to you from one website or another.  It's all the same as far as their expenses are concerned.  They're essentially trying to sell the same bandwidth twice.
 
2013-09-10 02:19:38 PM  

RexTalionis: If Verizon ultimately wins, expect then the rules are invalidated and every ISP is free to shape traffic.


At that point they aren't a common carrier and are responsible for all traffic on their network.

The RIAA/MPAA is licking their chops over the potential lawsuit revenue.
 
2013-09-10 02:20:47 PM  

Wellon Dowd: This is a non-issue. If Verizon starts dicking me over on my internet traffic I'll just resort to the free market and patronize one of their competitors who doesn't.


What competitors?  Verizon has a monopoly and these companies have actually sued people who tried to start up competition in local cities.
 
2013-09-10 02:36:06 PM  
Wouldn't this invalidate every contract they have to supply their customers with internet access?
 
2013-09-10 02:40:23 PM  

MrEricSir: Wouldn't this invalidate every contract they have to supply their customers with internet access?


Terms of Service
Verizon reserves the right to change any of the features, Content or applications of the Service at any time with or without notice to you. This includes the portal services we may make available as part of the Service or for an additional charge.

There is more there, but that about sums it up.
 
2013-09-10 02:52:41 PM  
Companies that want to do this are so dumb.
If sites (i.e.Amazon) do not pay then Verizon will either block or slow the connection to that site.  All the customer is going to see if that they cannot get to Amazon.com.  They will be calling Verizon tech support by the MILLONS to find out why their internet will not let them got to amazon.com.

Verizon will come off as ultra Douche and the caller will switch to a company that does not do this.

Bean counters in control never works for long

//Internet tech support agent (not Verizon)
 
2013-09-10 03:03:45 PM  

Rose McGowan Loveslave: Companies that want to do this are so dumb.
If sites (i.e.Amazon) do not pay then Verizon will either block or slow the connection to that site.  All the customer is going to see if that they cannot get to Amazon.com.  They will be calling Verizon tech support by the MILLONS to find out why their internet will not let them got to amazon.com.

Verizon will come off as ultra Douche and the caller will switch to a company that does not do this.

Bean counters in control never works for long

//Internet tech support agent (not Verizon)


See all the in-fighting between cable/satellite companies and channels: they will have a script ready explaining to customers that unfortunately Amazon is purposely keeping potential customers away just for using the most awesome ISP on the planet, and here is the number to call to urge them to stop their current policy which is shutting out customers like you (which never actually claims that it is Amazon changing policy but it sure does imply it.)

Amazon would probably win, but it would be a hard fought battle. And what about less influential sites, like the one you're on now. Do they have the sort of leverage Amazon has to push back?
 
2013-09-10 03:04:41 PM  

Rose McGowan Loveslave: Companies that want to do this are so dumb.
If sites (i.e.Amazon) do not pay then Verizon will either block or slow the connection to that site.  All the customer is going to see if that they cannot get to Amazon.com.  They will be calling Verizon tech support by the MILLONS to find out why their internet will not let them got to amazon.com.

Verizon will come off as ultra Douche and the caller will switch to a company that does not do this.

Bean counters in control never works for long

//Internet tech support agent (not Verizon)


If an ISP throttles their customers speed to a particular site, I'm willing to bet that most of their customers will be annoyed at the site for loading slowly, not at their ISP.
 
2013-09-10 03:08:51 PM  

Cybernetic: Maybe one of Verizon's lawyers can explain this to me:

Verizon offers FIOS, which provides both TV and internet service. For their TV service, they (as the carrier) pay carriage fees to the content providers for the right to offer that content to their subscribers. But now, for their internet service (which arrives over the exact same infrastructure as the TV service), they state that the content providers are supposed to pay carriage fees to the carrier for the right to be carried.

And what about a company like Netflix? They produce original content equivalent to that of other content providers who receive carriage fees from Verizon. If Netflix has to pay a fee to Verizon for carriage of data over Verizon's network, then Verizon should have to pay carriage fees to Netflix for the right to stream Netflix original content.


I can go both ways.  Some channels are leased-access, meaning the content provider Pays the cable company for carriage. Broadcast channels are generally "must carry" meaning if you broadcast in the area the cable company has to carry your signal for free, though broadcaster can charge they can't require carriage if they charge. Then there are the typical channels that cable pays to carry. Its a complicated system where the cable company has to negotiate with each individual channel over who pays who if any. The internet simplifies all this negotiation, Verizon apparently doesn't like it being simple.
 
2013-09-10 03:30:35 PM  

Dr. Kefarkian: FTFY


so glad the judges are smarter than this. i know you're being sarcastic, but fta, they specifically addressed this. verizon is trying to claim that content providers are using their traffic so they should pay them, but 2 of the judges corrected them by saying that the content providers have their own bandwidth providers and verizon is just fulfilling their customer's request to see the content.
 
2013-09-10 03:49:27 PM  

Cybernetic: Verizon offers FIOS, which provides both TV and internet service. For their TV service, they (as the carrier) pay carriage fees to the content providers for the right to offer that content to their subscribers. But now, for their internet service (which arrives over the exact same infrastructure as the TV service), they state that the content providers are supposed to pay carriage fees to the carrier for the right to be carried.


This is how I've always thought about it. I buy internet service so I can get to Amazon, Netflix, Fark, etc. and without those services my Comcast connection is useless. Seems like the big websites are selling points for the ISPs and if anyone owes anyone else money, the ISPs should be paying the big customer drawing websites for making the internet so integral to people's lives that they shell out money every month for access.
 
2013-09-10 04:15:15 PM  
That's farking stupid but money talks. At the end of the day, moneytalks.
 
2013-09-10 04:23:42 PM  

Wellon Dowd: This is a non-issue. If Verizon starts dicking me over on my internet traffic I'll just resort to the free market and patronize one of their competitors who doesn't.


You are assuming there will be one that doesn't.  You may have a choice between evils, but they will all be evil.

Do any other countries have net neutrality laws?  Is there any way to get my internet feed from there?
 
2013-09-10 04:26:05 PM  
so, can I just run a http server on my box at home, then call Verizon up and have them hook up some fios at my house for free?
 
2013-09-10 04:30:47 PM  

serial_crusher: so, can I just run a http server on my box at home, then call Verizon up and have them hook up some fios at my house for free?




Yes, Netflix and Amazon don't pay for their commercial accounts.
 
2013-09-10 04:32:29 PM  

eddievercetti: That's farking stupid but money talks. At the end of the day, moneytalks.


Not really.  It's not like they have a monopoly on the internet.  People aren't going to be thrilled to pay for internet access only to find that the sites they want aren't being delivered.  They'll go to another provider.

And what are these people thinking? I just don't see every major website paying a bribe to literally every provider, in fact, content is what rules the internet.  I wouldn't be surprised if the content providers decided to collectively cut all access to any provider who tries this.  Just imagine how fast people would cancel their internet subscription if even 300 of the top 500 websites cut out verizon's ip range.
 
2013-09-10 04:37:33 PM  

Nexzus: I'm not well versed in this so correct me if I'm wrong, but won't they lose common carrier status if they start doing this? Meaning they'll then be responsible for content going over their network?


I don't think they ever had common carrier status.

The counter to this stupidity of course is brain dead notices. If 20 million verizon customers got to google and it said: "Verizon is charging us to allow you to visit our search engine. Please pay us so we can pay them or phone them at ### to complain" that policy would change real quick.

If Verizon is blocking Google, Verizon customers won't see any message from Google at all.  Most likely they will see some other search engine that Verizon has agreed to redirect traffic to.

Google of course is the one site popular enough and powerful enough that an ISP would actually suffer for deny people access to it.  But FARK, for example, might only be available from certain ISPs, or from none.
 
Displayed 50 of 67 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report