172pilot

Member Since: February 23, 2010

Country: United States

Profile

Bio

Geek, pilot, dad.

Role

Network engineer

  • Really? Wow! My local store must be one of the ones that is staying - I went in there intending to buy all kinds of stuff I don’t need right now, and I found it had just been remodeled since the last time I was in there, and it seemed to have more useful stuff than normal, so although I am glad it will stay, I got no good deals!! :-)
    On the otherhand, the fundamental reason they’re dying hasn’t changed.. While I was in there, someone came in and asked if they had an “IC Puller”, and the sales kid had NO idea what he was talking about.. after a few minutes, the kid actually said “so you’re looking for something that takes out those things with pins on the side”?

    In the late 70’s/Early to mid 80’s, you could actually go into the store and expect some basic knowledge, and maybe even some help with a circuit you’re trying to build.. Not anymore.. If your question isn’t about the latest iPhone app, the kid just isn’t going to know…

  • OK.. Now I see where you’re coming from, and I think that makes sense, except that we don’t live in a world without consumer feedback. I think that reality, a startup by definition is going to start small enough to be off the radar and ignored by the ISPs, and as they grow, they’ll have the ability to fight back based on SLAs and customer complaint to the ISPs.

    Let me propose a fictional site I could create today called “MeTube”.. I would have my home quadcopter videos on it, and an invitation to join my site and post your own videos. By word of mouth, I manage to get a few of my friends to post a couple videos on it, and it starts to grow.. For now, I’m able to succeed on a T1’s worth of bandwidth, and everything is fine. As my site grows in popularity, I need to buy more bandwidth from my site to the Internet.. Let’s say I move it into a hosting provider, or put it on Amazon’s cloud services where I can dynamically buy enough bandwidth to serve my customers. As I grow, I can (MUST) monitor how much bandwidth I’m using, vs. what I’m paying for, and if my content begins to get throttled, it will be apparent because I wont be using my purchased bandwidth, but my service quality will be down. there’s NO WAY as a consumer that I’m going to stand for that, and I’m going to switch to another provider. There’s still enough providers out there that I should be able to find one that will promise me that they wont throttle my traffic, especially if that’s the contract I draw up with them. The same would be true on the consumer side. If I’m paying Comcast for 30mbps, and I can’t watch my nephew’s kickball video on “MyTube” and I see that I’m only getting 1mbps, I’m DEFINITELY going to complain to my provider, and switch providers, or service level agreements so that doesn’t happen to me anymore. As a consumer, I don’t care if it’s Comcast doing it, or one of their upstream providers. All I know is that as a customer of Comcast, I’m getting crap service. It will be in Comcast’s best interest to work with their providers to keep their own customers happy.

    Therefore, If the problem is in the cloud, between AWS and COMCAST, then they will have to eventually take care of that because of the customer complaints that they’re getting from BOTH sides.. Maybe they’ll install a direct link between themselves to avoid a bad backbone provider, or maybe they’ll tell the backbone provider that they need to stop throttling their customer’s traffic, and come up with another SLA between them.

    The point is, all of this dynamic interaction happens so fast, and so automatically, to make customers happy (or at least provide just enough service to convince customers not to leave), that there’s NO WAY that government intervention could possibly move quickly enough to make a positive impact on ANY of this. We already have contract law and civil courts to handle any breach of service contracts - We don’t need new laws for that.

    Is the end goal of this that all packets are created equal, and that regardless of type, source, or destination, they should all be routed in the order received? If so, then this is going to create a HUGE mess. There are good, valid reasons for QoS technologies to give higher priorities to packets which are real-time media, and lower priority to large, bulk file transfers that go for hours, but nobody cares if it gets there in 6 hours or 7. Existing ISP contracts can (but don’t have to) stipulate exactly how any customer’s traffic will be handled, and each customer has an SLA to refer to when troubleshooting their systems.

    I guess my point is that I see your concerns, but I believe all of that can be managed by the customer taking their dollars elsewhere, and/or by customer contracts dictating what SLAs are appropriate. I think getting the government involved is a mistake, and it’s just going to drive prices higher as the big guys buy off politicians (oops.. I mean “hire lobbyists”) and pass those costs off to you as the customers.. The more control you concentrate in Washington, the more dollars go there (from you) and the more corruption follows those dollars.

    Please let me know where I’m misiunderstanding here.. I’m not trying to have a fight - I’m trying to learn about this, and maybe have a real debate on the merits of this plan.. Nothing I’ve read out in the wild has been independent enough for me to not think it’s wildly biased one way or the other..

  • [“The freedom we want is the freedom to compete with those services”]

    As I’ve said twice already, I do not know what this classification is all about; My major concern is that giving the government more control typically does not in any way equal more freedom for anyone except those rich enough to lobby the government… I am truly trying to understand the positions here because EVERYTHING I read online about this seems to be VERY biased one way or the other and I’m not seeing any honest debate on the merits of the issue. If you are being denied a “freedom to compete with those services” can you explain how that is? If that’s true, there must be a law preventing you from doing so, right? I’m not being a smart a$$ about this, but why wouldn’t you want the repeal (ie: less government) of the law that is preventing competition, because to me, that seems the easiest way to a free market competitive situation.

    Can you explain to me how the current situation is stopping this competition? I truly am trying to understand exactly how everyone thinks the government is going to make this better…

  • So no companies would have been driven to provide services to customers without the regulation? If so, then how do you explain the Internet services we have today? Like I said, I don’t really know that much about what these regulations will do or mean, but I am definitely skeptical about giving government control over something that is going to drive money to lobbyists in order to try to influence those rules that provide the “freedom” that you’re after.. I’d rather have two (or 10) companies unencumbered by artificial requirements dictated by government show up at my door asking me what features I want, and then have a financial incentive to EARN my business rather than having them fight at the FAA headquarters to create rules that force me to have to use their services. And, I say that as I sit in a government building, looking out my window at the Capitol, and I drive by the FCC every day.. I live and work in the heart of this corruption, and it’s not pretty..

  • And where does that money come from? It comes from YOU the customer, which means that if you are a small ISP, and don’t have a large enough client base to spread the costs across, you can’t compete.. That becomes a BIG win for the big ISPs that can lobby the FCC to force specific features or speed guarantees onto the marketplace. If you think the government can control this without causing LESS service for more money, then you probably still believe that you can keep your doctor, and your costs are going to go down $2500/year…

  • “ Freedom for corporations is not freedom for people” ?? What?

    What about when a regulation imposed by the government to “guarantee” you this freedom actually has the effect of preventing a new startup from providing you a new service because some big company lobbied to have the FCC dictate some regulation or limit? Any time you give the government power like this, you are taking AWAY freedom from the marketplace, and concentrating power where it will corrupt the system because there is money to be made by those who control it. You might think it is going create you a freedom now, but just wait to see what it might cost you later…

  • Its funny you mention the communications act, when what we ended up with was a world in which it was illegal for you to wire your own phones or modems, and you had to call the phone company to come install (hardwire) one of the two types of phones you had a choice of (wall mount or desk).. Not until deregulation did we get first the “phone center stores”, and then eventually a system that literally exploded with innovation with modems going from 110 baud to 56k baud in a matter of a few years. Admittedly, I am completely ignorant of the issues in this Internet/FCC thing, having only read the propaganda from both sides, but I think the general skepticism comes from the belief that you should NEVER take the phrase “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help” without a huge helping of salt. Even if it solves some perceived problem today, giving the government more power in this regard is probably NOT a good idea. We already have contract law, and I think all of the access and bandwidth problems this is said to solve could be done in the private sector with contracts between consenting individuals and companies.

  • Protect them with a sign that says “beware of falling snow” and let darwin do the rest.. It’s the cheapest and most effective solution.

  • I remember in the ‘70s, wanting one of those, but never getting it.. Wow.. who knew it was so low tech.. basically a cheap accordion with an electric fan instead of bellows…

    That thing is begging for a MIDI-OUT plug.. :-)

  • Thanks for the reply.. Interesting about the 2 extra positions.. Maybe the question from “dgerton” about creating one with “11” (and even 12!) would be possible!! :-)

    Might have to order a couple of these just to play with.. I see an arduino based combination lock in my future.. :-)

No public wish lists :(