Elecraft

OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

Classic

List

Threaded

57 messages Options

123

Al Gulseth-2

OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

"- --- -.. .- -.-- .----. ... -.. . -.-. .. ... .. --- -. -... -.-- - .... . ..-. -.-. -.-."
(and so on: I think you get the drift - yes, it's this way on their website.)
There's a small note at the bottom stating "Readers in the 21st century can
read the translated statement here":

http://publicpolicy.verizon.com/blog/entry/fccs-throwback-thursday-move-imposes-1930s-rules-on-the-internet

73, Al
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Tom McCulloch

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

I'm sure Verizon's sarcasm will be lost on most!

Tom
WB2QDG
K2 1103

On 2/26/2015 6:32 PM, Al Gulseth wrote:

> "- --- -.. .- -.-- .----. ... -.. . -.-. .. ... .. --- -. -... -.-- - .... . ..-. -.-. -.-."
> (and so on: I think you get the drift - yes, it's this way on their website.)
> There's a small note at the bottom stating "Readers in the 21st century can
> read the translated statement here":
>
> http://publicpolicy.verizon.com/blog/entry/fccs-throwback-thursday-move-imposes-1930s-rules-on-the-internet
>
> 73, Al
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Joshua Gould, K8WXA

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

Code may be antiquated, but it will work just fine when their towers fail...

72,
Joshua Gould
K8WXA
EM89pn

KX3# 7480
NAQCC # 7704

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 6:53 PM, Tom McCulloch <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'm sure Verizon's sarcasm will be lost on most!
>
> Tom
> WB2QDG
> K2 1103
>
>
>
> On 2/26/2015 6:32 PM, Al Gulseth wrote:
>
>> "- --- -.. .- -.-- .----. ... -.. . -.-. .. ... .. --- -. -... -.--
>> - .... . ..-. -.-. -.-."
>> (and so on: I think you get the drift - yes, it's this way on their
>> website.)
>> There's a small note at the bottom stating "Readers in the 21st century
>> can
>> read the translated statement here":
>>
>> http://publicpolicy.verizon.com/blog/entry/fccs-throwback-
>> thursday-move-imposes-1930s-rules-on-the-internet
>>
>> 73, Al
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>>
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>

Elecraft mailing list

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

In reply to this post by Tom McCulloch

Even the Translated one is interesting
From: Tom McCulloch <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 6:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

I'm sure Verizon's sarcasm will be lost on most!

Tom
WB2QDG
K2 1103

On 2/26/2015 6:32 PM, Al Gulseth wrote:

>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Guy Olinger K2AV

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

Looks like they are really p*ssed off that they are not going to be able to
charge all that extra money for using fast channels. Guess they were
counting on getting that in their executive bonuses. I'm sure the repairmen
weren't going to get any of it.

The internet is a national resource. No one should be able to "corner" it.
Instead try making money the old-fashioned way...

I pay money every month for extra bandwidth. That ought to be enough to
keep that bandwidth and not have it whittled down by slow tracks for some
of my preferred stuff. Slow tracks are the inevitable result of fast
tracks. Further **I** want to decide where I spend **my** paid-for extra
bandwidth, not have it decided for me by Verizon based on money **they**
make. .

No sympathy, but you probably already figured that out.

73, Guy.

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 8:14 PM, Harry Yingst via Elecraft <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Even the Translated one is interesting
> From: Tom McCulloch <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 6:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality:
> in Morse code!!
>
> I'm sure Verizon's sarcasm will be lost on most!
>
> Tom
> WB2QDG
> K2 1103
>
>
> On 2/26/2015 6:32 PM, Al Gulseth wrote:
> > "- --- -.. .- -.-- .----. ... -.. . -.-. .. ... .. --- -. -... -.-- -
> .... . ..-. -.-. -.-."
> > (and so on: I think you get the drift - yes, it's this way on their
> website.)
> > There's a small note at the bottom stating "Readers in the 21st century
> can
> > read the translated statement here":
> >
> >
> http://publicpolicy.verizon.com/blog/entry/fccs-throwback-thursday-move-imposes-1930s-rules-on-the-internet
> >
> > 73, Al
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Elecraft mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:[hidden email]
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> > Message delivered to [hidden email]
>
>
> >
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>

Tony Estep

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 7:31 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> ...internet is a national resource. No one should be able to "corner"
> it....
> ==========

Unfortunately, so-called "neutrality" means that one company, Netflix, can
corner it without paying for it. Netflix accounts for up to 35% of internet
traffic, and is really the one and only beneficiary of this ruling.
Everybody else is subsidizing them. In any event, I'm just glad I'm not a
regulator.

Tony KT0NY
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Tom McCulloch

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

In reply to this post by Guy Olinger K2AV

Guy is right. And we have Al Gore to thank! ;-)

Tom wb2qdg
K2# 1103

PS -- that's enough of this, here comes Eric! :-[
T

On 2/26/2015 8:31 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:
>
>
> ...The internet is a national resource...
>

--

Life is too short for the Economy Button

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Scott Manthe-2

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

In reply to this post by Tony Estep

Tony,
All of Netflix's customers are the beneficiary of this ruling, as well
as anyone who uses Youtube, Hulu or any other streaming service. Netflix
uses the most bandwidth because they have the most customers. It isn't
only the companies like these that benefit, it's their customers. The
Internet doesn't exist as some libertarian fantasy world. The only ones
that were going to benefit from from being able to turn the hose off and
on were the one's who own the hose, not the one's who use it. Net
neutrality is not a bad thing.

73,
Scott, N9AA

On 2/26/15 8:57 PM, Tony Estep wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 7:31 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> ...internet is a national resource. No one should be able to "corner"
>> it....
>> ==========
> Unfortunately, so-called "neutrality" means that one company, Netflix, can
> corner it without paying for it. Netflix accounts for up to 35% of internet
> traffic, and is really the one and only beneficiary of this ruling.
> Everybody else is subsidizing them. In any event, I'm just glad I'm not a
> regulator.
>
> Tony KT0NY
>

EricJ-2

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

Nobody has explained it any better than you have in this short
paragraph, Scott. This is a national resource and the American people
should be the beneficiaries. The ones everyone seems to be forgetting
are the customers--the American people.

Everything's always about corporations anymore, not ordinary Americans.
Someone said they should make money the old fashioned way. Yea, by
satisfying customers, not by manipulating our laws in their favor.

Eric
KE6US

On 2/26/2015 6:47 PM, Scott Manthe wrote:

> Tony,
> All of Netflix's customers are the beneficiary of this ruling, as well
> as anyone who uses Youtube, Hulu or any other streaming service.
> Netflix uses the most bandwidth because they have the most customers.
> It isn't only the companies like these that benefit, it's their
> customers. The Internet doesn't exist as some libertarian fantasy
> world. The only ones that were going to benefit from from being able
> to turn the hose off and on were the one's who own the hose, not the
> one's who use it. Net neutrality is not a bad thing.
>
> 73,
> Scott, N9AA
>
>
> On 2/26/15 8:57 PM, Tony Estep wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 7:31 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> ...internet is a national resource. No one should be able to "corner"
>>> it....
>>> ==========
>> Unfortunately, so-called "neutrality" means that one company,
>> Netflix, can
>> corner it without paying for it. Netflix accounts for up to 35% of
>> internet
>> traffic, and is really the one and only beneficiary of this ruling.
>> Everybody else is subsidizing them. In any event, I'm just glad I'm
>> not a
>> regulator.
>>
>> Tony KT0NY
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>
>

Joe Subich, W4TV-4

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

In reply to this post by Tony Estep

On 2015-02-26 8:57 PM, Tony Estep wrote:
> Unfortunately, so-called "neutrality" means that one company,
> Netflix, can corner it without paying for it. Netflix accounts for
> up to 35% of internet traffic, and is really the one and only
> beneficiary of this ruling. Everybody else is subsidizing them.

Netflix and other information providers play plenty to enter the
data on the web. Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, Time Warner, etc. have
no business holding the end users for ransom when it comes to
receiving that data and/or determining what data the user may
access. At least they are being told they can't do with broadband
what they (the cable companies) have done to niche players in the
video arena for decades (pay for play).

Not only should the consumer access providers be treated like
common carriers, they should be treated like public utilities they are
and be required to provide equivalent service levels at the same price
to all customers whether they live in the metropolitan core or some-
where west of Last Gasp. Cable companies have forever "creamed" their
franchise areas, shaking down developers for the cost of wiring new
projects and/or demanding CC&Rs that limit access to competing service,
and wiring high density housing while bypassing older areas with one
home per one, five or ten acres even when both are encompassed by the
same franchise territory.

Perhaps this will start to put an end to one of the poorest performing
and most variable user access systems in the world. When it comes to
data rates and cost the US isn't even in the top tier.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

w0mu

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

Has anyone read the regulations that they kept hidden? Do we really
know what is in them?

I am not a big fan of the gov't sticking their fingers into everything.
I have no more trust in them handling this any better than everything
else the touch, regulate, control, etc.

I am quite skeptical of the reasons behind this less than transparent
change.

Mike W0MU

On 2/26/2015 8:33 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

>
> On 2015-02-26 8:57 PM, Tony Estep wrote:
>> Unfortunately, so-called "neutrality" means that one company,
>> Netflix, can corner it without paying for it. Netflix accounts for
>> up to 35% of internet traffic, and is really the one and only
>> beneficiary of this ruling. Everybody else is subsidizing them.
>
> Netflix and other information providers play plenty to enter the
> data on the web. Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, Time Warner, etc. have
> no business holding the end users for ransom when it comes to
> receiving that data and/or determining what data the user may
> access. At least they are being told they can't do with broadband
> what they (the cable companies) have done to niche players in the
> video arena for decades (pay for play).
>
> Not only should the consumer access providers be treated like
> common carriers, they should be treated like public utilities they are
> and be required to provide equivalent service levels at the same price
> to all customers whether they live in the metropolitan core or some-
> where west of Last Gasp. Cable companies have forever "creamed" their
> franchise areas, shaking down developers for the cost of wiring new
> projects and/or demanding CC&Rs that limit access to competing service,
> and wiring high density housing while bypassing older areas with one
> home per one, five or ten acres even when both are encompassed by the
> same franchise territory.
>
> Perhaps this will start to put an end to one of the poorest performing
> and most variable user access systems in the world. When it comes to
> data rates and cost the US isn't even in the top tier.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

Phil Kane-2

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

In reply to this post by Joe Subich, W4TV-4

On 2/26/2015 7:33 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

> Not only should the consumer access providers be treated like
> common carriers, they should be treated like public utilities they are
> and be required to provide equivalent service levels at the same price
> to all customers whether they live in the metropolitan core or some-
> where west of Last Gasp.

That's what all the Title II fracas is about. Those of us in the
professional (regulatory) field fault the FCC of 20 years ago for not
insisting on that but creating this "information service" category
rather than putting them in the "telecommunications service" category
from the beginning.

As hams we are used to having the FCC look over our shoulders to make
sure that we play by the rules. It's time that the "broadband"
infrastructure providers get a taste of that.

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
Elecraft K2/100 s/n 5402

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

NK7Z

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

In reply to this post by Tony Estep

That's 35% of the US traffic, not "Internet traffic".

Also, the reason Netflix uses so much bandwidth is because they have
customers who use that bandwidth! I see zero issue with the latest
ruling.
--
Thanks and 73's,
For equipment, and software setups and reviews see:
www.nk7z.net
for MixW support see;
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info
for Dopplergram information see:
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dopplergram/info
for MM-SSTV see:
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MM-SSTV/info

On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 19:57 -0600, Tony Estep wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 7:31 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > ...internet is a national resource. No one should be able to "corner"
> > it....
> > ==========
>
> Unfortunately, so-called "neutrality" means that one company, Netflix, can
> corner it without paying for it. Netflix accounts for up to 35% of internet
> traffic, and is really the one and only beneficiary of this ruling.
> Everybody else is subsidizing them. In any event, I'm just glad I'm not a
> regulator.
>
> Tony KT0NY
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

Merv Schweigert

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

In reply to this post by Guy Olinger K2AV

Just remember its brought to you by the same people who said you can
keep your doctor,
keep your health plan,
As FCC commissioner said today, no worries you can keep your internet,
we will make it
better..

> Looks like they are really p*ssed off that they are not going to be able to
> charge all that extra money for using fast channels. Guess they were
> counting on getting that in their executive bonuses. I'm sure the repairmen
> weren't going to get any of it.
>
> The internet is a national resource. No one should be able to "corner" it.
> Instead try making money the old-fashioned way...
>
> I pay money every month for extra bandwidth. That ought to be enough to
> keep that bandwidth and not have it whittled down by slow tracks for some
> of my preferred stuff. Slow tracks are the inevitable result of fast
> tracks. Further **I** want to decide where I spend **my** paid-for extra
> bandwidth, not have it decided for me by Verizon based on money **they**
> make. .
>
> No sympathy, but you probably already figured that out.
>
> 73, Guy.
>
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 8:14 PM, Harry Yingst via Elecraft <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Even the Translated one is interesting
>> From: Tom McCulloch <[hidden email]>
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 6:53 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality:
>> in Morse code!!
>>
>> I'm sure Verizon's sarcasm will be lost on most!
>>
>> Tom
>> WB2QDG
>> K2 1103
>>
>>
>> On 2/26/2015 6:32 PM, Al Gulseth wrote:
>>> "- --- -.. .- -.-- .----. ... -.. . -.-. .. ... .. --- -. -... -.-- -
>> .... . ..-. -.-. -.-."
>>> (and so on: I think you get the drift - yes, it's this way on their
>> website.)
>>> There's a small note at the bottom stating "Readers in the 21st century
>> can
>>> read the translated statement here":
>>>
>>>
>> http://publicpolicy.verizon.com/blog/entry/fccs-throwback-thursday-move-imposes-1930s-rules-on-the-internet
>>> 73, Al
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>

Joe Subich, W4TV-4

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

In reply to this post by w0mu

On 2015-02-26 11:08 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
> Has anyone read the regulations that they kept hidden? Do we really
> know what is in them?

Look at the last set of "Net Neutrality" regulations from the FCC -
the ones that the industry had over turned on the grounds that the
Commission did not have the authority to adopt them because "Broadband
was not a utility".

Seems to me the industry got what they wanted <G> forced the Commission
to reclassify "Information Service" as "Communications Utility." Voice
and cable have been regulated as utilities for a very long time - who
in their right mind would consider broadband data delivered on the very
same networks to be anything other than a utility for the very reasons
that voice and cable are utilities?

73,

... Joe, W4TV
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Cliff Frescura

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

*Netflix* got what they wanted. They had better lobbyists and took a
dispute between them and Comcast, expanded the scope to include the entire
internet, and then got the .gov on their side.

73,

K3LL/6

-----Original Message-----
From: Elecraft [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Joe
Subich, W4TV
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 8:30 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in
Morse code!!

On 2015-02-26 11:08 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
> Has anyone read the regulations that they kept hidden? Do we really
> know what is in them?

Look at the last set of "Net Neutrality" regulations from the FCC - the ones
that the industry had over turned on the grounds that the Commission did not
have the authority to adopt them because "Broadband was not a utility".

Seems to me the industry got what they wanted <G> forced the Commission to
reclassify "Information Service" as "Communications Utility." Voice and
cable have been regulated as utilities for a very long time - who in their
right mind would consider broadband data delivered on the very same networks
to be anything other than a utility for the very reasons that voice and
cable are utilities?

73,

... Joe, W4TV
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message
delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Dave-7

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

In reply to this post by Joe Subich, W4TV-4

Be careful what you wish for here. Keep in mind that once the
entrenched providers get the regs they crave new services will grind
to a halt. There will simply be too many barriers to entry. No new
competitors will enter the field. At least not until the subsidies get
so grossly unbalanced that the pot of gold is then worth the effort
(see MCI vs AT&T).

The internet has grown rapidly *because* it is not regulated. Once it
gets regulated then everything must go through regulatory approval.
There will fewer and fewer new services.

A good example of this is 'high speed' - 64 kb - data service to the
home. AT&T had the technology available in the early to mid 70's.
Called it ISDN. But due to both internal politics and regulatory
issues it was not rolled out until the early 90's. Much too late. The
same thing will happen once the pols take over the internet. Nothing
will get approved without them getting their cut.

As for those who say the the internet is a utility . . . well . . .
your electric service is a utility. Does everyone pay the same
electric bill no matter how much electricity they use? Broadband
should be no different. Those who use the most should pay the most.
There is no justification for taxing those who use little bandwidth to
subsidize the heavy users. Let the heavy users pay their fair share
and not burden those who are light users.

Just as in electricity, it is cheap and easy to measure the quantity
consumed by each user. No justification whatsoever for charging one
flat fee to all (none that is, other than "I want somebody else to pay
for my bandwidth").

73 de dave
ab9ca/4

On 2/26/15 10:30 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

> On 2015-02-26 11:08 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
>> Has anyone read the regulations that they kept hidden? Do we really
>> know what is in them?
>
> Look at the last set of "Net Neutrality" regulations from the FCC -
> the ones that the industry had over turned on the grounds that the
> Commission did not have the authority to adopt them because "Broadband
> was not a utility".
>
> Seems to me the industry got what they wanted <G> forced the Commission
> to reclassify "Information Service" as "Communications Utility." Voice
> and cable have been regulated as utilities for a very long time - who
> in their right mind would consider broadband data delivered on the very
> same networks to be anything other than a utility for the very reasons
> that voice and cable are utilities?
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>

W1KSZ

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

In reply to this post by Scott Manthe-2

Unless you are a customer out in the Desert, then you are stuck with DSL
and streaming
movies that look like the ones on my 1953 Admiral back in the B&W days.

If all this means I get 100 MB downloads in my lifetime, I am all for it.

73, Dick, W1KSZ

On 2/26/2015 7:47 PM, Scott Manthe wrote:

Jim Brown-10

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

In reply to this post by Phil Kane-2

I'm with you, Phil. As I recall, you're retired FCC staff. If anyone
understands FCC Rules, you do.

I WANT (caps added for emphasis) FCC regulation of our airwaves, and of
our internet. I'm old enough to remember when the FCC had staff to
enforce their Rules, and things were much better then. We lived in fear
of the FCC, and kept our noses clean. Anyone who subscribes to cable has
experienced bills that increase for no reason, and when it's the only
game in town, as it is for my internet, all we can do is pay it. So YES,
YES, YES, I want someone sitting in Comcast's shoulder. These assholes
are billing me monthly rent for a cable modem that I BOUGHT from a local
store in 2006, and there isn't a damned thing I can do about it. YES, I
want regulation!

Now, those who demand "small government" have made the FCC toothless,
without the budget to enforce their own Rules. THAT'S why we have RF
noise from all those consumer devices that make it difficult to use our
ham stations, and even to tune in AM radio.

73, Jim K9YC

On Thu,2/26/2015 8:09 PM, Phil Kane wrote:
> That's what all the Title II fracas is about. Those of us in the
> professional (regulatory) field fault the FCC of 20 years ago for not
> insisting on that but creating this "information service" category
> rather than putting them in the "telecommunications service" category
> from the beginning.
>
> As hams we are used to having the FCC look over our shoulders to make
> sure that we play by the rules. It's time that the "broadband"
> infrastructure providers get a taste of that.

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Cliff Frescura

Re: [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!!

In my younger years I thought of the FCC of a regulatory and technology
body. My thinking changed when UPS successfully lobbied the FCC in 1989 to
reallocate part of 220MHz from Amateur to Commercial service.

UPS argued that the reallocation was in the "public interest" and they would
put the spectrum to good use.

After a ruling in their favor, UPS never commercially deployed and the
spectrum was unused for quite some time.

Be sure to read the fine print and understand the players. One person's
regulation is another person's corporatism.

73,

K3LL/6

-----Original Message-----
From: Elecraft [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jim
Brown
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 10:28 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in
Morse code!!

I'm with you, Phil. As I recall, you're retired FCC staff. If anyone
understands FCC Rules, you do.

I WANT (caps added for emphasis) FCC regulation of our airwaves, and of our
internet. I'm old enough to remember when the FCC had staff to enforce their
Rules, and things were much better then. We lived in fear of the FCC, and
kept our noses clean. Anyone who subscribes to cable has experienced bills
that increase for no reason, and when it's the only game in town, as it is
for my internet, all we can do is pay it. So YES, YES, YES, I want someone
sitting in Comcast's shoulder. These assholes are billing me monthly rent
for a cable modem that I BOUGHT from a local store in 2006, and there isn't
a damned thing I can do about it. YES, I want regulation!

Now, those who demand "small government" have made the FCC toothless,
without the budget to enforce their own Rules. THAT'S why we have RF noise
from all those consumer devices that make it difficult to use our ham
stations, and even to tune in AM radio.

73, Jim K9YC

On Thu,2/26/2015 8:09 PM, Phil Kane wrote:
> That's what all the Title II fracas is about. Those of us in the
> professional (regulatory) field fault the FCC of 20 years ago for not
> insisting on that but creating this "information service" category
> rather than putting them in the "telecommunications service" category
> from the beginning.
>
> As hams we are used to having the FCC look over our shoulders to make
> sure that we play by the rules. It's time that the "broadband"
> infrastructure providers get a taste of that.

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message
delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

123