Verizon says you're kiddie porn viewers

Verizon says you're kiddie porn viewers

Sorry to say but Verizon is removing the entire alt.* usenet hierarchy
this week. It seems kiddie porn showed up in an alt. group so their
solution is to get rid of all alt groups.

It's beyond me how this group has anything to do with kiddie porn.

Re: Verizon says you're kiddie porn viewers

In <f3b2a5dd-60c8-4379-b27e-a56d6e96d71e@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups,com >,
on Sun, 22 Jun 2008 17:50:09 -0700 (PDT), Gene De Lisa,
GeneDeLisa@gmail,com wrote:
> Sorry to say but Verizon is removing the entire alt.* usenet hierarchy
> this week. It seems kiddie porn showed up in an alt. group so their
> solution is to get rid of all alt groups.
>
> It's beyond me how this group has anything to do with kiddie porn.

I was on metrocast 5 years ago when they did the same
thing. Many ISPs are looking to drop Usenet anyway,
especially binaries, as they claim that 5% of their
users are sucking up 95% of the bandwidth. I find that
dubious to say the least, but Cuomo came along and
provided the perfect excuse.

Time-Warner/RoadRunner, my ISP, is discontinuing all
Usenet tomorrow. I'll just have to use teranews or
aioe or one of the other free servers. Service isn't
quite as good, but I'll give 'er a whirl for awhile.
If it's too spotty/slow/unreliable, I'll pay the 10
Euros a year or whatever it is for NIN.
** Posted from http :// www .teranews,com **

Re: Verizon says you're kiddie porn viewers

Steve Ackman wrote:
> In
> <f3b2a5dd-60c8-4379-b27e-a56d6e96d71e@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups,com >,
> on Sun, 22 Jun 2008 17:50:09 -0700 (PDT), Gene De Lisa,
> GeneDeLisa@gmail,com wrote:
>> Sorry to say but Verizon is removing the entire alt.* usenet
>> hierarchy this week. It seems kiddie porn showed up in an alt. group
>> so their solution is to get rid of all alt groups.
>>
>> It's beyond me how this group has anything to do with kiddie porn.
>

Much the same happened to a couple of the ISPs I use to use here in the UK.
But all I did was move on to one that guaranteed to keep the Usenet.

The main problem apparently was binary groups which since file shareing was
pressured off the main P2P sites moved to the Usenet and Oh boy do they suck
up bandwidth.
So what my current ISP says is they will only keep non-binary ones. Which is
fine by me.
Non-binary ones being text only surely can't use much space?

Can't you ask your ISP to do the Text Only ones? I reckon that alt kiddie
porn business is just an excuse...

(Is it true that in the US you can't move to another ISP?)

Slatts

Re: Verizon says you're kiddie porn viewers


"Sla#s" <phil@KNOTslatts,net > wrote in message
news:g3ns07$p33$1@localhost.localdomain...
> (Is it true that in the US you can't move to another ISP?)
>
If you mean 56k dial-up, then no, you can dial whoever you want. But when
it comes to broadband (which is where most people are or are moving to) then
you are stuck with your local cable company usually, though in some areas
you can also get FIOS (fiber optic). Theoretically you can buy DSL from
alternative carriers but they have to rent the wires from the local phone
company so there is little to be gained by this. So the answer is, it
depends.

The right thing would be for ISP's to unbundle usenet. Some people (most
actually) who never use usenet could save a couple of $ (which is how much
Verizon must pay to buy a usenet package for each subscriber from a 3rd
party provider. My ISP (Comcast) contracts with giganews.) Those that
really use it could elect to forego the credit for the limited package that
they are getting now (I think I get 2GB/month , which is useless for
binaries). Or you could use your $2 credit to contribute toward a real
usenet package from a 3rd party for $10 or $15/ month.

Re: Verizon says you're kiddie porn viewers

Jack Denver <nunuvyer@netscape,net > wrote:
> 2GB/month , which is useless for binaries). Or you could use your $2
> credit to contribute toward a real usenet package from a 3rd party
> for $10 or $15/ month.

yeah; I keep wondering why some ppl think that "no free usenet access =no usenet". Just pay to 3rd party. It makes sense even if ones ISP is
providing "free" usenet, just for better customer support and longer
group retention.


B.

Re: Verizon says you're kiddie porn viewers


"Bronek Kozicki" <brok@spam-trap-cop,net > wrote in message
news:%Al8k.184065$pm2.173853@en-nntp-04.dc1.easynews,com ...
> Jack Denver <nunuvyer@netscape,net > wrote:
>> 2GB/month , which is useless for binaries). Or you could use your $2
>> credit to contribute toward a real usenet package from a 3rd party
>> for $10 or $15/ month.
>
> yeah; I keep wondering why some ppl think that "no free usenet access => no usenet". Just pay to 3rd party. It makes sense even if ones ISP is
> providing "free" usenet, just for better customer support and longer group
> retention.
>
>
> B.
>
In people's minds, bundled = "free" and there's some logic - when Verizon
takes away usenet, are they going to drop the price on their bundle? No, I
didn't think so. Same thing with "free" meals on airplanes, "free"
directory assistance, etc. - unbundling is fine if you pass the savings on
to the consumer, but somehow they never do.

Re: Verizon says you're kiddie porn viewers

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 09:26:11 -0400, "Jack Denver"
<nunuvyer@netscape,net > wrote:

>>
>In people's minds, bundled = "free" and there's some logic - when Verizon
>takes away usenet, are they going to drop the price on their bundle? No, I
>didn't think so. Same thing with "free" meals on airplanes, "free"
>directory assistance, etc. - unbundling is fine if you pass the savings on
>to the consumer, but somehow they never do.

Or, they do by not raising prices. Something that may have been
necessary to continue the bundle.





_______________________________________
Please Note: If you find a posting or message from me
offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate.

Re: Verizon says you're kiddie porn viewers

Right, so it's a price increase without actually increasing the
prices...like when your "pound" of coffee weighs 13, 12,11 oz.

This stuff happens most often when sellers are feeling squeezed - OTOH their
costs are going up (along with fuel prices), OTOH, the economy is soft
(like RIGHT NOW) so consumers are in no mood for actual increases in the
price tag. So you keep the price the same and reduce the quantity or remove
something from the bundle and make it an extra cost option. Look for this
to happen A LOT in the next few months.


<RoqueJa> wrote in message
news:7cl764t4vr4l94qmerca4illv7ttjoi45s@4ax,com ...
> On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 09:26:11 -0400, "Jack Denver"
> <nunuvyer@netscape,net > wrote:
>
>>>
>>In people's minds, bundled = "free" and there's some logic - when Verizon
>>takes away usenet, are they going to drop the price on their bundle? No, I
>>didn't think so. Same thing with "free" meals on airplanes, "free"
>>directory assistance, etc. - unbundling is fine if you pass the savings on
>>to the consumer, but somehow they never do.
>
> Or, they do by not raising prices. Something that may have been
> necessary to continue the bundle.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Please Note: If you find a posting or message from me
> offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
> If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
> me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate.

Re: Verizon says you're kiddie porn viewers

Jack Denver wrote:
>snip

> Look for this to happen A LOT in the next few months.

Would that it be only a few months but sadly I expect much longer.

Re: Verizon says you're kiddie porn viewers

In <dcednePmI6D6z_3VnZ2dnUVZ_h3inZ2d@comcast,com >, on Mon, 23 Jun 2008
21:48:02 -0400, Jack Denver, nunuvyer@netscape,net wrote:
>
> The right thing would be for ISP's to unbundle usenet.

As if...

> Some people (most
> actually) who never use usenet could save a couple of $ (which is how much
> Verizon must pay to buy a usenet package for each subscriber from a 3rd
> party provider.

Time-Warner/RoadRunner just discontinued Usenet as
did Metrocast ~5 years ago. Nobody's monthly bill is
going down. There is no such thing as "saving a couple
dollars" due to discontinuation or "unbundling" of Usenet
except for the ISPs. Much as you might like to fantasize
about it being the "right thing for them to do," it's not
going to happen.

> (I think I get 2GB/month , which is useless for
> binaries).

Somewhere you've lost some decimal points, Jack.
That's 3 CD's worth of data!
Given a generous "average page" of 2K, that 2GB of
data is equivalent to a MILLION page book. EVERY MONTH.
Given an "average image" size of 1 MB, that 2GB of
data is equivalent to 2000 photos.

Sooo... a 2 GB/month plan was never conceived as a
"text plan" and the only reason for an allotment that
large is exactly for binaries.

>Or you could use your $2 credit to contribute toward a real
> usenet package from a 3rd party for $10 or $15/ month.

Best wishes for getting a credit when Comcast
unbundles Usenet. My e-mail to Time-Warner on the
subject went unanswered.

Re: Verizon says you're kiddie porn viewers


"Steve Ackman" <steve@SNIP-THIS.twoloonscoffee,com > wrote in message
news:slrng64t7u.efj.steve@sorceror.wizard.dyndns.org...
> In <dcednePmI6D6z 3VnZ2dnUVZ h3inZ2d@comcast,com >, on Mon, 23 Jun 2008
> 21:48:02 -0400, Jack Denver, nunuvyer@netscape,net wrote:
>>
>> The right thing would be for ISP's to unbundle usenet.
>
> As if...
>
>> Some people (most
>> actually) who never use usenet could save a couple of $ (which is how
>> much
>> Verizon must pay to buy a usenet package for each subscriber from a 3rd
>> party provider.
>
> Time-Warner/RoadRunner just discontinued Usenet as
> did Metrocast ~5 years ago. Nobody's monthly bill is
> going down. There is no such thing as "saving a couple
> dollars" due to discontinuation or "unbundling" of Usenet
> except for the ISPs. Much as you might like to fantasize
> about it being the "right thing for them to do," it's not
> going to happen.
>
>> (I think I get 2GB/month , which is useless for
>> binaries).
>
> Somewhere you've lost some decimal points, Jack.
> That's 3 CD's worth of data!
> Given a generous "average page" of 2K, that 2GB of
> data is equivalent to a MILLION page book. EVERY MONTH.
> Given an "average image" size of 1 MB, that 2GB of
> data is equivalent to 2000 photos.
>
> Sooo... a 2 GB/month plan was never conceived as a
> "text plan" and the only reason for an allotment that
> large is exactly for binaries.
>
>>Or you could use your $2 credit to contribute toward a real
>> usenet package from a 3rd party for $10 or $15/ month.
>
> Best wishes for getting a credit when Comcast
> unbundles Usenet. My e-mail to Time-Warner on the
> subject went unanswered.

I realized that "unbundling" to corporations means charging you more for the
same thing. I didn't just fall off the turnip truck

2 GB is certainly there for binaries but if you consider that a single video
DVD (uncompressed) is 8.5 GB, and a bluray holds 50gb, then it is not a lot.
The ISPs have been playing a double game on bandwith in general - they keep
upping their speeds, but apparently this is only to allow you to load your
homepage faster - they are giving you a firehose but they only allow you to
turn it on for a few minutes a month.

Re: Verizon says you're kiddie porn viewers

In <WaydnX5_EIVbCP_VnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@comcast,com >, on Wed, 25 Jun 2008
15:00:26 -0400, Jack Denver, nunuvyer@netscape,net wrote:

> I realized that "unbundling" to corporations means charging you more for the
> same thing. I didn't just fall off the turnip truck

I wasn't implying you just fell off the turnip truck,
but you did seem to be playing one on TV. ;-)

> 2 GB is certainly there for binaries but if you consider that a single video
> DVD (uncompressed) is 8.5 GB, and a bluray holds 50gb, then it is not a lot.

The thing is that Usenet was conceived and
implemented as a 7-bit (text) communication protocol.
UUencoding was just the first kludge to allow binaries
to be shared across Usenet as well as text; one that
created a ~38% overhead in file size alone.

> The ISPs have been playing a double game on bandwith in general - they keep
> upping their speeds, but apparently this is only to allow you to load your
> homepage faster - they are giving you a firehose but they only allow you to
> turn it on for a few minutes a month.

You know how Usenet works. Each file has to be
transferred tens of thousands of times from server to
server. So each binary incurs a data transfer total of
many thousand times its size multiplied by its encoding
overhead BEFORE even one single end user downloads it.

With today's capacities, image files measured in
the single digit MBs are nothing compared to "excess
capacity," and as you point out, it's really the
multimedia files that are starting to put a squeeze on.

Let's say I upload a 5GB DVD binary of my family
vacation that not a single person in the world would
be interested in, and let's say it propagates to even
5000 news servers. You're looking at terabytes of
data transfers for 0 end user downloads.
Now to be more realistic, lots of people are set up
to download everything in a few group, and then discard
what they're not interested in. So on top of the "back
end" bandwidth, you now have countless numbers of end
users downloading something only to immediately delete
it. So, now petabytes of file transfers as a result of
a single file upload that nobody wanted.

Now, I make that same DVD available via web or ftp
server or P2P and nobody downloads it - zero
bandwidth.

It's no wonder ISPs and backbone providers would
like to do away with binary Usenet... at least
multimedia transfers.

Re: Verizon says you're kiddie porn viewers

Steve Ackman <steve@SNIP-THIS.twoloonscoffee,com > wrote:
>> Or you could use your $2 credit to contribute toward a real
>> usenet package from a 3rd party for $10 or $15/ month.

I suspect the actual figures are much, much lower. Won't be surprised if
cost/customer in Verizon is well under $1 (not counting bandwidth on
user side - just servers with feeds). It's effect of scale. I pay to 3rd
party mere $3 for 10GB plan.


B.

Re: Verizon says you're kiddie porn viewers


"Steve Ackman" wrote:
> I was on metrocast 5 years ago when they did the same
> thing. Many ISPs are looking to drop Usenet anyway,
> especially binaries, as they claim that 5% of their
> users are sucking up 95% of the bandwidth.
[...]
Gee, I wonder why the big ISPs aren't seized with the same levelling impulse
when considering the fact that 5% of our population controls 95% of the
wealth ... just a thought.
--
alan

Re: Verizon says you're kiddie porn viewers

On 6/22/2008 8:50 PM, Gene De Lisa wrote:
> Sorry to say but Verizon is removing the entire alt.* usenet hierarchy
> this week. It seems kiddie porn showed up in an alt. group so their
> solution is to get rid of all alt groups.
>
> It's beyond me how this group has anything to do with kiddie porn.

Verizon simply decided to allow access to the "big 8" news hierarchies
and cut all others. This also cuts their Usenet traffic volume hugely,
because it eliminates all the alt.* warez and porn binaries.

In any event, since I'm accessing this from Verizon residential fiber,
I'll say so long, it's been fun lurking (and occasionally posting) here.
I've learned a lot about coffee and espresso, and I'll miss a.c.

--
Michael D. Sullivan
Bethesda, MD (USA)
(To reply, change example.invalid to com in the address.)