On 19 Oct 2007 at 8:34, Julia Thompson wrote: > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/17/AR2007101702359.html > > A 75-year-old woman took out her frustration on the lack of reasonable > service from Comcast with a hammer. > > The tone isn't quite journalistic, but if you're looking for amusement, > it'll do nicely.
Comcast are also, incidentally, blocking P2P and anything that looks like P2P. By packet tampering. http://machinist.salon.com/blog/2007/10/19/comcast/ This is what a lot of the origional net neutrality was about - the baseline. Prioritisation is fine, degrading selectively isn't. (i.e. You might chose to priotitise VoIP traffic from your "selected partner" on their pay service so they're allways rock-steady. Fine. But then artifically introducing noise into or dropping other VoIP traffic by shaping those connections bandwidth severely? Not fine.) AndrewC Dawn Falcon _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
