What is Digg?213 Comments
- TheMidnight, on 01/10/2008, -2/+123Damn this is getting old. I can't watch DVDs on my computer attached to a TV. I can't play music on certain players. I can't watch HDTV on certain sets. I can't skip previews on DVDs and TV is trying to electronically force me to watch commercials (remember that Phillips chip?). I can't download Linux ISOs because BitTorrent goes dead every five minutes because of traffic filtering. I can't play my games on more than one of *MY* computers. And now they want to read my Internet traffic? *****, the benefits of being legal are looking more and more dismal.
- Rehnborg, on 01/10/2008, -2/+92This is going to kill there business when Google or some non ISP giant steps up to the plate and offers non-filtered material.
- Cybie, on 01/10/2008, -2/+63Ok if this comes to pass, here's what you do. If AT&T does this for some content, they loose their safe harbor privlege. Copyright EVERYTHING you do on-line. Every blog post, every email, every stupid photo you send. Send a copy to AT&T so they can fingerprint it. This will overload their system for handling this stuff... Then sue, when they fail to prevent your precious content from being distributed.
- inactive, on 01/10/2008, -3/+58Please don't give the smart people left in this country another reason to flee.
- dd240sx, on 01/10/2008, -2/+42this sounds very creepy
- deadbaby, on 01/10/2008, -2/+34I'm sure the MPAA/RIAA will be willing to pay ISPs to use this hardware so the adoption rate will likely be very fast. There's always encrypted protocols & good ole' fashion offline piracy to fill the void.
- novacodova, on 01/10/2008, -2/+33copyright?! They just want us to start paying for access to what we really want... thanks at&t and nbc.
- salinemist, on 01/10/2008, -0/+27You're not legal, we're all criminals with the huge installed base of law that's resident.
- apc3161, on 01/10/2008, -1/+23Exactly, that's why I don't think police should require warrants to investigate people's home or wiretap their phones. Police should be able to come into your house and make sure you aren't breaking the law. I mean after all, if you have nothing to hide what's the big deal?
Ok I'm done with my sarcasm. I want you to google two phrases together "colonial America" and "writ of assistance." - stephant, on 01/10/2008, -0/+20The problem is they are going to sniff packets you idiot. Seriously, you want them sniffing everything you send and receive? Sure they can say they only sniff for copyrighted material but once the system is in place they can sniff for anything they desire. Who will be the oversight for this? You? Dear god I hope not.
- manofsteele54, on 01/10/2008, -5/+25***** THE RIAA!
- raynard07, on 01/10/2008, -4/+22it sounds like an opportunity for a new breed of ISP
- BassMastr, on 01/10/2008, -5/+21They better not mess with my porn!
- DavidGX, on 01/10/2008, -2/+18Net Neutrality? Anyone? Hello?
You know, "free market"'ers, NN is NOT giving the government control of the internet it simply means they can't discriminate like they're planning to do here. The FREE MARKET can't solve ***** if there isn't enough competition. IF we all had at least 3 or 4 GOOD broadband providers in our are this might not be an issue, we could simply switch. Most places have 1, maybe 2 providers. And in places with 2, it's usually cable and ***** DSL.
The FREE MARKET can't solve anything here, we NEED NN! - Kishoba, on 01/10/2008, -1/+16Seriously people. We need to tell our congressmen and judges that this crap has to stop. Net nuetrality, and all this cencorship, is going beyond the rights of anybody. This is absolute crap.
- deadowl, on 01/10/2008, -0/+14A new hacker revolution? Where we communicate with extremely paranoid encryption schemes? Sounds like fun!!!
- trotskyist, on 01/10/2008, -1/+15Ugh, my choices for broadband are ATT & Comcast.
I guess I'm *****. - netdroid9, on 01/10/2008, -0/+14Wait, what? Haven't we gone over this? Bittorrent is a protocol, not the physical embodiment of software piracy. You disable Bittorrent and the pirates will move to a different protocol
- sp3kter, on 01/10/2008, -0/+13After reading every post in the comments it occurred to me that at least 3/4's of digg has no idea what net neutrality is. so let me give you a short explanation and hopefully enlighten you.
AT&T and other large corp isp's are wanting to charge smaller web site owners to make sure that there information is guaranteed to move through there network. in order to do this they will charge the website or on line provider money (basically for use of there network) this in turn will be passed on to the user of such services by the website.
I'll give you an example...
AT&T tells digg that in order to guarantee that people that use at&t can access digg they are going to charge them $x.yz every month. this in turn would cause digg to have to charge the customer $x.yz every month to make up for the costs. if digg did not pay they would basically be excluded from the accessible network that at&t has. you can liken it a bit to the old satellite wars...sat company X had certain channels that sat company Y didn't have.
of course this does bring into play filtering of content and yes it means that in a small part that bit torrent traffic would be regulated...but that's just a chip off the iceberg.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality - elstavon, on 01/10/2008, -2/+15if people got even a little bit organized, this would be a brilliant strategy.
- stephant, on 01/10/2008, -0/+13Then so are your bank records, employment records, credit card records, etc. You apparently don't care about privacy at all. That's fine by me but you should keep a sign on your car and house that says, "I have nothing to hide. Anyone may come inside to have a look around any time they want."
Surely you have some kind of TV subscription or phone subscription that you enjoy in your home. Should these people be able to enter your house at any time to see what you are watching or talking about? I mean, it's their network, you don't own it, and what if you're somehow infringing on the copyright of another? They surely have the right to see what you're doing with it right? - xdcc, on 01/10/2008, -3/+14or kill the internet when the government mandates that all ISPs filter or face huge fines that put them out of business. The infrastructure costs alone will put all small legit ISPs out of business so only the AT&Ts/Comcasts survive. A little down the road the UN will require all countries to submit to new copyright laws (along with content deemed harmful) restricting internet use or face new sanctions..
- bobman2007, on 01/10/2008, -2/+12And yet most of these ISPs are storing copyrighted material on their newsgroups servers for their users to download...
- inactive, on 01/10/2008, -4/+14We are so *****. Will our last source of unbiased information be destroyed?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3954858769 ... - shampoovta, on 01/10/2008, -0/+10and AT&T
- georgelulu, on 01/10/2008, -1/+10First comes filtering
Second comes full blown censorship to protect their interests. - pigfister, on 01/10/2008, -0/+9Its a complete farce, this will last about 30seconds until ppl use a p2p app with encryption, like most bit torrent clients already do!
this is about controlling freedom of speech as it will not help in any way curtail piracy!
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/01/09/att-mulls-cop ...
FTA: This strategy will work for approximately 30 seconds -- about as long as it takes for people who like to download copyrighted works to switch to using an encrypted protocol -- and thereafter it will be primarily useful to bullies and schemers who will use it to silence critics (by claiming their works infringe and getting them censored) and prevent competition (by raising the cost of operating an ISP through the inclusion of the spyware and the hardware to run it on). - bigt8dogg, on 01/10/2008, -0/+8Our forefathers are turning in their graves.
- LucidHawk, on 01/10/2008, -0/+8As pro free market as I am, I agree with you to some degree. Telecommunications is not comparable to many other "products" in the market. The tendency is very much toward standardization and monopoly because the market penetration methodology is different. A ISP has to either buy out lines or install their own. If someone wants to sell you a car for example they don't have to create roads (lines) across the country to your home or rent someone else's roads (lines) to get the car to you. If they did then we would see even less competition among car makers. Not the greatest analogy but you get the point..
- Derrekito, on 01/10/2008, -2/+10Please just stop. You fail. Go back to school. Thx bye.
- InfamousAtheist, on 01/10/2008, -0/+8No, it's not that simple. As the commenters above me already pointed out, some of us, myself included, have only one or two broadband ISP providers to choose from. In Houston, you have Comcast, AT&T, and if you get really desperate you can go satellite with Hughesnet (I think - not sure they're even still around) which I think everyone knows... sucks MAJOR ass.
So the answer is to generate enough public outcry against this sort of infringement on our digital rights and to get the government involved. We either need more choices (my preferred option) or the feds need to force these ***** to open up the pipes.
Fight for your digital rights! Content filtering should be illegal! - inactive, on 01/10/2008, -1/+9It won't be long until fox news and cnn are the only websites we are allowed to visit.
- inactive, on 01/10/2008, -1/+9Kill American Internet. The rest of the world can move happily onwards. I have said it before and i will say it again. America is getting ***** up.
- pintomp3, on 01/10/2008, -0/+8for many people that would mean having no internet access.
- inactive, on 01/10/2008, -1/+8*slaps forehead*, *shakes head* and *groans*
- netdroid9, on 01/10/2008, -1/+8Wait, what? I don't know much about Ron Paul, but if the majority of Digg users think he's awesome surely he can't believe in no government moderation of business. That's what leads to collusion, back-room deals and, well, the RIAA.
- Tweekster, on 01/10/2008, -5/+12good, but i dont think canada wants another teenage runaway
- CrazedLeper, on 01/10/2008, -1/+8"We've got to figure a friendly way to do it".
--------------------------------------------------------------------->
How about "don't"? - pintomp3, on 01/10/2008, -0/+7that's a lot of infrastructure to setup.
- stephant, on 01/10/2008, -2/+8I'm not so sure about that. They seem to have a business model of empowering consumers (android instantly comes to mind) which has served them extremely well so far. They may choose to filter but it wouldn't be something I would predict.
- javaroast, on 01/10/2008, -0/+6If AT&T got this off the ground you'd have a hard time boycotting them. As they are one of the major backbone providers a large percentage of internet traffic has to pass through their routers at some point.
- MacEnvy, on 01/10/2008, -0/+5Well, for years they have been steadily buying up all the dark fiber they can get their hands on ... that's backbone, buddy.
http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Infrastructure/Google-and ... - bjornski, on 01/10/2008, -0/+5And the taxpayers will pay for it.
And it will be promptly handed over to one of the for-profit companies so they can charge us out the ass to use it. - trotskyist, on 01/10/2008, -0/+5My broadband options are ATT & Comcast. I could use dialup I guess, but it's not like I would be able to download any "copyrighted material" under those circumstances either.
- bjornski, on 01/10/2008, -0/+5So is Google going to use their own network then? Backbone included?
If they use the AT&T network in any way, this info will still be "shared" with AT&T, and filtered/tiered as they see fit.
Unless Google runs their own backbone across the nation, they have to get THEIR connection from someone. - MacEnvy, on 01/10/2008, -0/+5I can only assume you mean mesh wireless, which is a great idea but not new. There's at least one implementation already in the wild, being used by the OLPC folks.
- ChaosMotor, on 01/10/2008, -1/+6Well, then, it's time to change that. I'm working on a set of technologies that will give everyone FREE universal wireless internet access without any ISPs or private networks.
http://chaosmotor.wordpress.com/2008/01/10/whats-w ... - lcmatt, on 01/10/2008, -0/+4Torrent encryption isn't enough (Sandvine can detect the traffic and drop the packets). Hopefully TPB's new torrent client might help prevent that though.
- LucidHawk, on 01/10/2008, -2/+6I like the way you think Cybie.
- DavidGX, on 01/10/2008, -1/+5The internet tough guys are in full force today aren't they? Just how do you know what he was downloading was illegal? You DO know that torrents have many, many legal uses, don't you? I mean, you should, because after all WE'RE the "***** nerd *****" and you're (and nice little homophobic remark there btw) the internet tough guy so surely you know better than we do.
Please do educate us further. -
Show 51 - 100 of 208 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is