http://www.joemanna.com/blog/fcc-comcast-blocked-torrent-traffic-outside-of-peak-usage/ Joe Manna's Personal Blog. Community manager, social media strategist and very opinionated. Thu, 09 Sep 2010 23:59:50 +0000 hourly 1 http://www.joemanna.com/blog/fcc-comcast-blocked-torrent-traffic-outside-of-peak-usage/comment-page-1/#comment-49047 Joseph Manna Wed, 12 Aug 2009 23:51:57 +0000 http://www.joemanna.com/blog/?p=535#comment-49047 Interesting. I would be willing to venture that Cerf merely was a cog in the machine of older business models of charging per x-amount of emails, usage, etc. Interesting. I would be willing to venture that Cerf merely was a cog in the machine of older business models of charging per x-amount of emails, usage, etc.

]]> http://www.joemanna.com/blog/fcc-comcast-blocked-torrent-traffic-outside-of-peak-usage/comment-page-1/#comment-49046 Fernando Mon, 10 Aug 2009 15:21:11 +0000 http://www.joemanna.com/blog/?p=535#comment-49046 You should double check to see if Vint Cerf really *is* on side of net neutrality. I suspect this table is incorrect. During the late 90s, I was a member on "MCI One", MCI's internet provider. Vint Cert was head of this department. Under Vint Cerf, emails were limited (you couldn't send more than 20-or-so emails in an hour. Doing so, you would get suspended until you called back and spoke to customer tech that didn't even know their email admins were doing this and pointing this out to them, they still would not check it for themselves. Also, MCI One ran their own usenet servers, and posting on it would not propagate outside their own servers. So replying to a message on it, only other MCI users would see your post. That makes the post worthless if you're posting a message answering a question from a user from another ISP. Also, there were very low posting limits on usenet ... so you couldn't post binaries larger than 20 or 30KB. Thats why its doubtful that Vint Cerf would be in favor of net neutrality. His real actions put him firmly on the extreme side of limiting bandwidth and free access to internet resources. You should double check to see if Vint Cerf really *is* on side of net neutrality. I suspect this table is incorrect. During the late 90s, I was a member on “MCI One”, MCI's internet provider. Vint Cert was head of this department. Under Vint Cerf, emails were limited (you couldn't send more than 20-or-so emails in an hour. Doing so, you would get suspended until you called back and spoke to customer tech that didn't even know their email admins were doing this and pointing this out to them, they still would not check it for themselves. Also, MCI One ran their own usenet servers, and posting on it would not propagate outside their own servers. So replying to a message on it, only other MCI users would see your post. That makes the post worthless if you're posting a message answering a question from a user from another ISP. Also, there were very low posting limits on usenet … so you couldn't post binaries larger than 20 or 30KB. Thats why its doubtful that Vint Cerf would be in favor of net neutrality. His real actions put him firmly on the extreme side of limiting bandwidth and free access to internet resources.

]]> http://www.joemanna.com/blog/fcc-comcast-blocked-torrent-traffic-outside-of-peak-usage/comment-page-1/#comment-47789 joe blo Mon, 04 Aug 2008 23:46:39 +0000 http://www.joemanna.com/blog/?p=535#comment-47789 f__k comcast. commie bastards f__k comcast. commie bastards

]]>