Comcast at it again

[Skuzzy]

Not sure of any of you Comcast folks have been keeping p with the quagmire Comcast has been going through.  Earlier this month, the FCC forced Comcast to allow all its users unabated access to the Internet.

Now Comcast has announced a new plan to combat high bandwidth users.

That VOIP contract they have must be worth a fortune in revenue for them to keep on putting themselves in the path of legal dump trucks.

[Yenny]

good thing I boot comcast out of the door for charter.

[dunnrite]

Hughesnet is just as bad, worse IMO.  From the hours of 5pm to about 10pm my bandwith speed goes from 1000kbps to about 15-20kbps.  They regulate how much you can download (going by price of course).  And I pay $90 plus a month for it.  Go figure.  I love the small town, but...

[WilldCrd]

I read about this in one of our internal <verizon> newsletters today.
there is alot more to the story, I will dig it out of my email and post it here shortly, but basically they are "trying" out a new system as well that allows them to drill down further into what content you are viewing. Supposedly any personal info is scrubbed however the potential for abuse according to my sources is far to severe.
The execs at verizon have stated enfatically <sp> that we will not be doing such practices due to the outcry from consumer groups. Supposedly they <comedycast> wont look at your email, encrypted data ect. The artical states that just because they "say" they wont do it doesnt mean that they wont.

[CAP1]

I read about this in one of our internal <verizon> newsletters today.
there is alot more to the story, I will dig it out of my email and post it here shortly, but basically they are "trying" out a new system as well that allows them to drill down further into what content you are viewing. Supposedly any personal info is scrubbed however the potential for abuse according to my sources is far to severe.
The execs at verizon have stated enfatically <sp> that we will not be doing such practices due to the outcry from consumer groups. Supposedly they <comedycast> wont look at your email, encrypted data ect. The artical states that just because they "say" they wont do it doesnt mean that they wont.

WELL, I HAVE CRAPCAST HERE AT THE SHOP, and am logged on all day long, as my information systems are online. if they start charging me extra, i'll dump em faster than you can blink. i use verizon dsl at home, and it works perfectly fine. 8 years i've had it now, and not one single problem.....ever.

i can see crapcast slow down once in awhile dureing the day here......

[WilldCrd]

Here is an article regarding regarding the deep digging that comedycast and possibly AT&T are "trying out". Personally this stuff sceeeres the crap outta me. I cant copy the internal verizon newsletter about this due to legal restrictions. I can say that as of now Verizon has no plans to implement such a thing <this statement from our CEO > mainly due to consumer advocacy groups and the fact that we will gain more customers if we dont engage in this practice

Internet Providers' New Tool Raises Deep Privacy Concerns
Rob Pegoraro
756 words
Thu Aug 21, 12:00 AM ET
Washington Post


 
If you're reading this story on our Web site, I don't know what

you did online before you reached this page. But your Internet

provider might if it engages in something called deep packet

inspection. That phrase may sound like what the Transportation

Security Administration does to uncooperative airline passengers,

but on the Internet it means a thorough and automatic inspection

of online traffic -- not just where you've been but also what

you've seen.

Peering inside the digital packets of data zipping across the

Internet -- in real time, for tens of thousands of users at once

-- was commercially impractical until recently. But the ceaseless

march of processing power has made it feasible.

Unsurprisingly, companies have been trying to turn this potential

into profit. By tracking users' Web habits this closely, they can

gain a much more detailed picture of their interests -- and then

display precisely targeted, premium-priced ads.

Equally unsurprising, these attempts have become a

public-relations tar pit for Internet providers that experimented

with this technology without giving users fair warning.

The House Committee on Energy and Commerce recently asked dozens

of providers to explain whether they had done any such testing.

Most companies said they had yet to try the technology and had no

plans to do so. (Although AT&T allowed that "if done properly,"

deep packet inspection "could prove quite valuable to consumers.")

A handful of providers -- for example, the Sprint spinoff Embarq

and The Washington Post Co.'s Cable One -- said they briefly

tested a deep-packet-inspection ad service provided by NebuAd, a

start-up from Redwood City, Calif.

These companies said the tests guarded their customers' privacy.

Cable One, for example, told the committee that it did not monitor

encrypted Web traffic (such as bank transactions), e-mail, instant

messages or Internet phone calls and said that NebuAd stripped out

all personal references before analyzing those limited data.

The providers also said that were they to engage in deep packet

inspection again, they would record data only from users who

expressly allowed it.

Taking these companies at their word, what's there to worry about?

We trade privacy for convenience all the time. We visit sites that

keep far less detailed records of our comings and goings with

"cookies" -- the small placeholder text files they drop on our

hard drives. Millions of people subject themselves to more

intensive scrutiny when they use Google's Gmail service, which

scans the text of each message to place more relevant ads.

If deep packet inspection lives up to its promises, it might even

yield a cash benefit. Internet providers using this technology

could afford to offer customers a deal: Accept this scrutiny, and

we'll knock $10 a month off your bill.

But systems such as deep packet inspection unnerve a lot of

Internet users for sound reasons.

One is, of course, the immensely greater surveillance they allow.

Tracking via cookies is the rough equivalent of a supermarket

clerk noting that you spend a lot of time in Aisle 9 checking out

cereal but never duck into Aisle 2 for frozen dinners. Deep packet

inspection, by contrast, is more like the clerk following you to

see which boxes of cereal you eyeballed -- and doing so at every

store you visit, even those run by other companies.

Another concern is the difficulty of circumventing this constant

tracking. You can tell your browser to reject the third-party

cookies set by ad networks such as Google's DoubleClick, but the

machinery of deep packet inspection hides out of reach in your

provider's servers.

A third concern is the lack of competition for broadband service

in much of the United States -- if your provider sets up deep

packet inspection, you may not be able to protest by taking your

business elsewhere.

But the worst aspect of this kind of "augmented" or "enhanced

tracking" (pick a euphemism) is how badly and in how many ways it

could fail.

What if a wrongly configured system records more data than

intended?

What if these records aren't as anonymous as advertised? (Imagine

how much your Web use would say about where you live, work and

play -- even with all mentions of your name scrubbed out.)

What if the company running the inspections loses track of a

laptop or a backup tape with these records?

What if businesses that feel threatened by the Internet, such as

some record labels and movie studios, ask providers to use these

inspection tools to screen for certain online activities?

What if government agencies make similar requests?

As an old saying goes, abuse of power comes as no surprise. But

neither should neglect and carelessness.
 

 

[Mustaine]

All I can think of is "Dumb Trucks"

[Fulmar]

Skuzzy's personal war against Verizon wages on!

[WilldCrd]

Skuzzy's personal war against Verizon wages on!

  I do beleive he was talking about comedycast.....

[Skuzzy]

I thought I was too.  Must be all thie l33t speak causing the confusion..

[Fulmar]

Long day at work....

[lasersailor184]

Thanks for the heads up.



But I've personally never had a problem with comcast.  At least here in our region in SE pennsylvania, they are fine.

[DiabloTX]

Last November when Crapcast said they were going to up my rates to the tune of about 5% I shrugged it off, cost of living increase.  When I got the bill it was a 48% increase.  The next day I pulled both set top boxes and the residential gateway and dropped them off at the Crapcast office and shot them the middle finger as I walked out the door. 

I don't regret it at all.

[Masherbrum]

.....and this is one of the many reasons I have DSL and DirecTV.   

Cable Companies suck.   

[Elfie]

Thanks for the heads up.



But I've personally never had a problem with comcast.  At least here in our region in SE pennsylvania, they are fine.

We have Comcast, internet, cable tv and phone.....

We get the occasional cable outage but I've never lived anywhere that didn't happen from time to time.