On Sunday 23 September 2007 18:35:10 willhill wrote: [snip] > If you tell me again that it's right for others to filter my internet > connection and email, I will tell you the above again. The more I learn, > the more the story is the same. >
I can see both sides of this argument, but it doesn't change a couple of things. The internet was designed from the beginning to route around damage, and while they may not have considered corporate actions as a source of damage, many people consider it to be so. The internet will route around it, partly because of the infrastructure itself, partly because of consumer movement inspiring competition on the "freedom" side of the offerings (net neutrality debates aside), and partly because places that restrict themselves will eventually be surpassed by other places that don't. One only needs look at what is going on in China, and to a lesser extent other countries, to realize that this is so. Those that want the information find a way to get it in spite of things like TCP resets, which are worse than simple port blocking. As a recent movie was fond of telling us, "You can't stop the signal." Or in terms of the FLOSS movement, "information wants to be free" -- Thanks, Fernando Vilas fvilas at iname.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. Url : http://mail.brlug.net/pipermail/general_brlug.net/attachments/20070923/cc574de0/attachment-0001.bin
