e public from any gross violation of unfair business practice.
Ruben
On Mon, 2006-03-20 at 23:36 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Ruben Safir wrote:
>
>
> > "common carrier" and, so far, have managed to do so. Before 1996, such
> > classification
On Mon, 2006-03-20 at 23:36 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> So, which part of this is unclear to you, Ruben? ISPs are not common
> carriers. Done and done. In the alternate reality, the one you wish you
> lived in, they might be, but here on earth, we aren't.
>
Why did you snip the part on
:24, Ruben Safir wrote:
> common carrier
> One entry found for common carrier.
>
>
> Main Entry: common carrier
> Function: noun
> : a business or agency that is
> available to the public for
> transportation of persons, goods, or
> messages
>
>
> For Mor
common carrier
One entry found for common carrier.
Main Entry: common carrier
Function: noun
: a business or agency that is
available to the public for
transportation of persons, goods, or
messages
For More Information on "common carrier" go to Britannica.com
Get the Top 10 Search Results fo
"retail" and backbone) is an
"information service" (not subject to common carrier obligations) rather
than a "telecommunications service" (which might be classified as
"common carriage").
[edit]
On Mon, 2006-03-20 at 22:23, Ruben Safir wrote:
> On Mon
>
> The only place where this type of anti-competitive practice makes any
> business sense is if you already have a natural monopoly to work with.
>
> Like the last mile.
>
Actually it makes all the sense in the world for Cable Television and
VoIP phone providers and anyone else who decides th
On Mon, 2006-03-20 at 11:04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Ruben Safir wrote:
>
> > Clearly you depend on Verizon for access to your customer base. Clearly
> > Verizon is a Common Carrier and Clearly YOU become a Common Carrier once
> > someone pu
On Mon, 2006-03-20 at 11:08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Ruben Safir wrote:
>
> > > As a result, you are entirely wrong about backbones 'processing' IP ToS
> > > tagged frames - no carrier that I know does respect user-set IP ToS tags
>
> ISPs are not common carriers. Really, we are not. I've previously pointed
> you to CFR which defines common carrier status. If you are too lazy to dig
> out the references, here's a brief:
>
Actually, you really are and I don't care what you pull out to argue
otherwise. The minute that you f
On Mon, 2006-03-20 at 13:10, Jim Henry wrote:
> Robin,
>I think what you are missing is the fact that one has no right
> to insist on their traffic being prioritized when it traverses the
> network, which is private property,
Thats incorrect twice.
First, it a common carrier and secondly,
>
> No Alex, nor someone like myself becomes a common carrier when some
> purchases service from us. The common part in question for us is the
> copper and fiber plant the public has paid for. Not the access hardware
> nor the service infrastructure ISP's develop that use that public
> infrastruct
>
> Most obviously, we use the fact that it is our circuit to provide
> guaranteed QoS to our VoIP products, if customer chooses to buy that.
> Now, if the "network neutrality" means we cannot (as a common
> carrier) prioritize certain packets over others, it is simply ridiculous.
>
Actually
>
> As a result, you are entirely wrong about backbones 'processing' IP ToS
> tagged frames - no carrier that I know does respect user-set IP ToS tags
> with regard to queueing. All IP transit is "best effort". (exceptions are
> certain carriers offering IP-VPN, but that's beside this discussion,
> Welcome to state of wireless in 2006. We are running Orthogon Systems
> radios, and we get ~50mbps across ~15 miles with LoS partially obstructed
> by trees on the Queens side, and fresnel zone partially obstructed by
> buildings on Manhattan side.
Your site in Queens is Pretty lucky if 55 B
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 07:01:33PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'll avoid replying to ad-hominem attacks.
>
> On Sun, 19 Mar 2006, Ruben Safir wrote:
>
> > homes, and that uses Verizon. Your PTP connection to Queens uses
> > Verizon lines for that matter
On Sun, 2006-03-19 at 18:27 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I think I clearly explained the difference above. I'll repeat: 'If a
> monopoly carrier chooses not to allow others to have access to its
> network
> for resale, it should be bound by the "neutrality"'.
>
> Which part of this is unclear
On Sun, 2006-03-19 at 18:24 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Um
>
> a) Our space in 55 broad is not subsidized. We are paying the full
> market
> rate.
That WHOLE BUILDING is currently subsidized otherwise your "Market" rate
would be much higher, something I'm sure you noticed when shopping for
On Sun, 2006-03-19 at 11:29 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > It would include ALL common carrier providers, but to answer your
> silly
> > question, No, it doesn't seem silly to single out companies for
> > increased scrutiny and regulation who are given physical monopolies
> > communications ac
On Sun, 2006-03-19 at 11:29 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Um, how about...No? My network is *not* at dependent on common
> carrier
> access provided by VZ - we have DS1 loops that are not VZ, lit MTU
> buildings and wireless loops.
Oh Rally! You have your own techs now coming out of the su
On Sun, 2006-03-19 at 11:29 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm only opposed to the communist propaganda, whether yours or other
> groups.
ROFL!!! That is the best load of crap I've ever heard from you.
Thank you very much Mr Pilosoft. Anyone dealing with you should be
aware that they are fa
Well that is no surprise since your also opposed to nearly every other
Free Software and community initiative. The only reason you hang around
these communities is to grope money from them.
And GOD knows I wish that Verizon QOS'ed pilosoft.net to /dev/null.
Never the less, once you offer your
:0:
* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/dev/null
Congressmen - please add the following to your procmail filter if you
wish to retain my vote and campain contributions.
Ruben Safir
On Thu, 2006-03-16 at 20:17 -0500, Jim Henry wrote:
> Well spoken. I disagree with your goal, but you elucidate it well. I
The NYLXS Quarterly Journal committee will be meeting on Monday, March
20th at 7PM at the Killarny Rose, 80 Beaver Street, Manhattan Island.
Article Submissions and ideas will be taken on any and all topics
relating to Free Software.
Articles which are under way thus far include
GPL3 - The con
On Thu, 2006-03-16 at 12:57 -0800, Jim Henry wrote:
> Utilities such as cable companies don't get free access to
> streets, underground conduits, et. They PAY the community for it.
they extorted the communities for it. They can leave now.
Ruben
--
NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/
Un/S
On Thu, 2006-03-16 at 09:58 -0800, Jim Henry wrote:
> If you can show that Time Warner is
> involved in getting this legislation introduced,I willbe very
> surprised.
Time Warner is agaisnt the bill because they want to regulate the
internet based on their ill-begotten monopoly of our cables in
On Thu, 2006-03-16 at 09:50 -0800, Jim Henry wrote:
> Ruben,
>I do not work for Time Warner.
Yeah - right.
--
NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/
Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/
Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
On Thu, 2006-03-16 at 09:58 -0800, Jim Henry wrote:
> Ruben,
> I've no doubt that SOME of the Internet may be public
> property,though I don't know for sure. The Internet is not a
> single entity, it's made up of thousands of switches, routers,
> muxes, optical segments, etc., that are indee
On Thu, 2006-03-16 at 05:46 -0800, Jim Henry wrote:
> Ruben,
> Sorry you hate me.I don't know you well enough to even like or
> dis-like you. ;-)
>
I know enough about you. Your trying to hurt my children and make them
slaves to Time Warner's agenda on what they are and are not allowed to
rea
ired disruptor who is hired with hard cash to oppose the goals of your
organization.
Sincerly
Ruben Safir
President NYLXS
Founder of NY Fair Use
> Dana Spiegel
> Executive Director
> NYCwireless
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> www.NYCwireless.net
> +1 917 402 0422
>
> Read the Wir
>
> Why after so many years of fighting to keep the Internet largely free of
> regulation and taxation are some lawmakers and Internet companies now
> advocating for increased regulation of the Internet?
>
Oh this is so dapper.
You do Newspeak very well.
And when the Department of Commerce r
On Wed, 2006-03-15 at 23:01, Jim Henry wrote:
> OK. I guess I just have to conclude you're hard of listening. I think we're
> done.
> Jim
>
I'm sure that is the case with a lot of people you encounter (hint hint)
--
NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/
Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwirele
m at 2 or 3 am! That experience may have been unique to my
> job and my company, but it causes me to have less sympathy that all of those
> folks are no longer in those positions.
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> Jim
>
> > -Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Wed, 2006-03-15 at 22:27, Jim Henry wrote:
> Ruben,
>Telcos don't pay franchise fees in most cases to the best of my knowledge
> and are now doing their best to avoid paying them as cable companies do,
> even as the telcos begin to roll out video service.
> On the other hand, cable com
yment of IT professionals in
NYC. Its fairly unpleasant for a lot of people who have been
essentially screwed by Telco and the Cable Man (along with others I
might add).
Ruben
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
<< Make the U.S. more competitive? Look around you! It is other
nations who need to emulate us to attempt to compete with US. And as a
relative measure against ourselves, by all the parameters used to
measure the health of the U.S. economy (unemployment pct, cost of
living, inflation, # people em
> As to it not being about profit, I could not disagree more. Who is
> it supposedly making such a decision? Certainly no one in control of enough
> resources to make a substantial increase in broadband penetration. If so
> they'd be gone pretty quickly for fiscal incompetence.
And this is w
On Wed, 2006-03-15 at 19:13, Jim Henry wrote:
>. Anyone who understands how business works realizes
> that the positions they espouse make good sense.
> Respectfully,
> Jim
>
Anyone who understands how business works understands that this makes no
sense unless you want to prevent free market co
You may be right but I find this funny from someone using yahoo mail,
which will be one of the first casualties of a closed internet.
Ruben
On Wed, 2006-03-15 at 18:13, Rob Kelley wrote:
> Ok, I'll call it. "Astroturf!"
>
> For those who don't know, "Policy Analyst" Randolph May is actually
> w
On Wed, 2006-03-08 at 19:39 -0500, Joe Plotkin wrote:
> http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/kevinmaney/2006-03-07-att-bellsouth_x.htm
>
> AT&T-BellSouth merger grows from weakness
>
> Three years ago, BellSouth CEO Duane Ackerman popped into our offices to
> tell us how miserable his business
Hey Sara
Long Time no hear.
What's cooking with you. I last heard from you in Washington DC
when we stormed congress :)
Ruben
On 2004.09.08 20:01 "Stirland, Sarah" wrote:
Hi all --
I'm a writer at National Journal's Technology Daily in Washington DC,
and I'm working on a story that's too complicat
The GNOME Conference is being held this Satuday through Monday in Brooklyn.
We have some commitments from help to set up wireless, but need a couple of
more volunteers. Please help with this conference if you have time.
Ruben Safir
--
__
Brooklyn Linux Solutions
Hello
I supposed to be in touch with someone from NYWIRELESS today, but we seem to
have missed each others.
PLease email me at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks
Ruben
--
__
Brooklyn Linux Solutions
__
DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS http://fairus
We might need to set up a wireless network for about 200 seat at the GNOME
Summit at Brooklyn College. I have no expereince with Wireless.
Can we get some help from NYWIreless with this? It would be in November.
Barring that, I need to give CUNY a list of equiptment which we might need.
I have
The social impact of communication improvements is a facinating
area of study, and I'd be very interested.
Ruben
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 09:44:53AM -0700, Laura Forlano wrote:
> Here is a description about a new NYCwireless special
> interest group on the social impact of wireless
> technology
What speaker?
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 05:37:39PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Most of us can't hear the speaker. I can hear the people talking in the
> back of the room much better than I cn the speaker.
>
> Sociable chat server is down.
>
>
> --
> NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.ne
Will there be Uplinks from the Israeli capital, Jerusalem, and Chevron?
The jews there have a lot at stake in this stuff...
this war against iraq might finally mean freeing the jews from Arab
oppression .
ruben
On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 05:22:07PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > So I was wond
Pssst - Zap
Your a remove
On Sat, Feb 08, 2003 at 08:38:00PM -0500, V Ferri wrote:
> REMOVE ME FROM THE LIST
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, February 08, 20
I'll do it
On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 01:19:47PM -0400, Anthony Townsend wrote:
> Hi - we need someone with good Perl skills to write a logfile analysis
> script. It is nothing too complicated, estimated it would take a decent
> codewriter a few hours at most to whip someting up.
>
> This analysi
48 matches
Mail list logo
