Kill their sites! How? We will help you in this!
Obstructions of any site, portal, shop!

Different types of attacks: Date-attack, Trash, Attack, Attack, etc. Intellectual
You can work on schedule, as well as the simultaneous attack of several sites.

On average the data, ordered the site falls within 5 minutes after the start. As a demonstration of our capabilities, allows screening.

Our prices

24 hours of attack – $ 70
12 hours of the attack – $ 50
1 hour attack – $ 25

Contact via ICQ: 588 666 582

My point is that the lowest/cheapest tier should have its neutrality vigorously protected.

I also think that higher tiers should be pretty nondiscriminatory as well. Hence the structure of Tariff Rebate Passthrough. But we don’t have to be as heavy-handedly absolutist about the neutrality as we do for Jeffersonet.

CAM

Hi! Pleased to meetcha!

Last Friday we switched our cable TV service from Comcast to Verizon FiOS. The driver for the decision was that we had an old DSL service (Speakeasy) that had suddenly REALLY gone to hell. What’s really ironic/appropriate is that it only went to hell for vanilla http; other protocols still had the same old performance, such as SMTP and even https. Which all led to the weird result that I could surf much faster by logging into AOL and using their browser than I could in either Firefox or uncrippled IE. Go figure.

Anyhow, Verizon FiOS seemed more appealing that Comcast by every metric (speed, cost, service) so we had it installed. As of the first few days, it’s doing great.

Hmm. This is beginning to sound like a Verizon ad. I think I’ll go sign up for their affiliate program. It shall be my first such sign-up ever.

CAM

We already know what “edisonet” would look like: Compuserve, Prodigy, AOL, MCI Mail. The Internet was the asteroid that wiped out those dinosaurs. We also already have a tiered service network. It used to be called the Bell System. It hasn’t changed much since then.

There’s no example anywhere of a shared proprietary protocol yielding great service. Or even much service. Look at the wireless data offerings by the bells.

There’s also no evidence that the Internet is failing to innovate or invest. What’s preventing “video dial tone” isn’t TCP/IP or net neutrality; it’s the MPAA and DRM. No kind of tiered service will change that kind of thinking.

Finally, remember that each provider today already charges his customers what he wants. The “tiered service” advocates want to charge *others’* customers, based on content or origin or whatever. It’s a disguised way for Verizon, say, to charge enough extra on Vonage packets to put Vonage out of business. It’s all about — and *only* about — old-fashioned monopolistic control.

We don’t need a “compromise”. We need legislators and the nontechnical public to recognize that the Internet succeeds because of its free and nondiscriminatory structure. There’s no need or advantage to selling it to private interests. Let them try and fail again to build their own.

1. Jeffersonet didn’t work very well for a lot of folks until broadband became widely available. Even old-fashioned web pages didn’t load very fast over dial-up, for a lot of users in the “first 13 years”. Personally, I’d say close to half that period lacked the sort of everyday experience of “working just fine” that you describe.

2. Regulators have completely screwed up with respect to competition for the last mile (or last 100 feet) of cable/fiber. I don’t know anyone (not one person) who has an actual choice of who provides cable internet access to his/her home. This relates to the fact that I don’t know anyone who has an actual choice of who provides cable television, either. (Yes, I know that I can get satellite service, from one other competitor, but that’s not a perfect substitute.) Competition stopped when municipalities bent over and granted local monopolies. Good regulatory policy would have ensured that multiple content providers could compete over the same infrastructure, just as multiple long-distance carriers can compete over the same telephony infrastructure, or multiple wireless carriers can compete over the same tower infrastructure. That would still leave some regulatory and competitive problems, to be sure, but my local cable provider would behave much differentl (= better) if another provider could come to my home and say “here are our service options”.