Slashdot Mirror

While you're at it, look up Rhetorical.

From Dictionary.com

"Extortion \Ex*tor"tion\, n. [F. extorsion.] 1. The act of extorting; the act or practice of wresting anything from a person by force, by threats, or by any undue exercise of power; undue exaction; overcharge.

2. (Law) The offense committed by an officer who corruptly claims and takes, as his fee, money, or other thing of value, that is not due, or more than is due, or before it is due. --Abbott.

3. That which is extorted or exacted by force. "

I never metamod redundent, no one does.

Guess again. I always try to metamod ignorant moderators to HELL. The dumbass moderators need to look up the meaning of Redundant before they use the option.

See you in Meta Moderation Hell, assholes.

Can you think of a better way to mould a linux distro into these features? Easy! Give a distro to an entire country and learn as you go. After a while you get:
a) Less installation problems (install something on 1/2 million machines and you find the bugs)
b) Countries like this can't afford M$ licence prices (then again, who can?)
and
c) A definition of 'popular' is Suited to or within the means of ordinary people: popular prices. (Dictionary.com)

No reason to put people down for attempting to make the best out of a situation.

Too bad, unfortunately in your idiotic haste to cast down our friend Jon, you happened to be completely wrong.

Because there is no such thing as centrifugal force.

The fact that your degenerated and obviously limited intelligence hasn't allowed you the opportunity to discover the world of centrifugal force doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Click here and learn.

Not to be confused with centripetal force.

Because there is no such thing as centrifugal force.

The fact that your degenerated and obviously limited intelligence hasn't allowed you the opportunity to discover the world of centrifugal force doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Click here and learn.

Not to be confused with centripetal force.

Definitely

Public Domain has different rights and obligations. If you place work under the Public Domain you may be responsible for problems with it, where the GPL allows you to not be responsible for errors.

Think along the lines that if you placed a bomb in public domain or GPL. In the public domain, you would be in trouble, but if you put it out saying 'this is dangerous and you are responsible if you do something stupid or illigal', you have covered yourself.

There are other open source and free licenses available that don't require the re-distribution of source with modifications, along the lines of the LGPL, the Artistic license, BSD license, and QT's license system, to name a few.

As to GPL'ed software not for certain purposes, the gpl allows you the freedom to use it (see the definition of freedom). The GPL keeps you from taking free work and making it non-free. Businesses are free to take GPL'd software and use it in their programs, and say 'we use gzip -- here is where you can get it', but that doesn't mean they have to give away all their products.

Want to Subsidize an ILEC? By Dana Blankenhorn ISPworld News The most important rulings in the history of ILEC-CLEC warfare are about to be made, and so far the FCC hasn't heard from you on it. The rulings are FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making in CC Docket No. 02-33 (NPRM 02-33), and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45 (FNPRM 96-45). The first would extend charges under the Universal Service Fee (USF) to wireless ISPs, including Wi-Fi operators in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz band. The second would change the way the USF is calculated, switching from a charge based on users to one based on bandwidth. The result would be a tax on broadband users, all broadband users, and this money would go directly to your ILEC competitors. That's because the rules under which the USF is disbursed mandate that they go to incumbent carriers if those carriers can, and agree to provide service. The carriers also get money directly for managing the fund - some are accused of putting 10% of the money directly into their own bank accounts, and keeping it there. Wi-Fi visionary Dave Hughes says he's amazed that no WISPs "filed ANYTHING on the FCC Web site against the FCC's 'proposed' forcing all telecommunications 'last mile' deliverers - DSL, Cable AND Wireless, whether no-license or licensed TO PAY INTO THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND!" It's not just the money. "You want to now be subject to Federal forms, collections, and Audits in your little WISP operation?" This can be a huge amount of paperwork, maybe 2-3 days of an employee's time per month, and could easily turn your simple ISP service bills into a bunch of "junk fees" just like phone bills. Hughes has been around this track before. The best-known USF service is the "e-rate" subsidy, aimed at putting Internet access into schools. "Had the schools been able to use e-rate USF funds to BUY wireless equipment that could connect up their various cross-town schools together, then you wireless resellers could have supplied - on a one time purchase and installation basis - about 90% of ALL 16,000 school districts with internal zero-monthly-cost broadband connectivity." ILEC greed now means there are $4.75 billion in requests for e-rate funds, but only $2.25 billion available. All this means that right now you need to click on this link -- http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi. Type 02-33 under Proceedings, in the upper-left corner, to read the comments that have come in so far. You can also download the proceeding's text, so you'll know what you're talking about. (Take special note of Section IV (starts on page 36, or Paragraph 79 about "Other Broadband Platforms"). Next, click on http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi, fill in the form, then either type or upload your comments. Make them civil, make them to the point, and concentrate on how much further that money would go if it weren't under ILEC mismanagement. (The same procedure will let you comment on 96-45.) Do it now. You have until May 3 but if you leave this page you might forget. Do it now, and urge your largest customers to do it as well.

Want to Subsidize an ILEC? By Dana Blankenhorn ISPworld News The most important rulings in the history of ILEC-CLEC warfare are about to be made, and so far the FCC hasn't heard from you on it. The rulings are FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making in CC Docket No. 02-33 (NPRM 02-33), and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45 (FNPRM 96-45). The first would extend charges under the Universal Service Fee (USF) to wireless ISPs, including Wi-Fi operators in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz band. The second would change the way the USF is calculated, switching from a charge based on users to one based on bandwidth. The result would be a tax on broadband users, all broadband users, and this money would go directly to your ILEC competitors. That's because the rules under which the USF is disbursed mandate that they go to incumbent carriers if those carriers can, and agree to provide service. The carriers also get money directly for managing the fund - some are accused of putting 10% of the money directly into their own bank accounts, and keeping it there. Wi-Fi visionary Dave Hughes says he's amazed that no WISPs "filed ANYTHING on the FCC Web site against the FCC's 'proposed' forcing all telecommunications 'last mile' deliverers - DSL, Cable AND Wireless, whether no-license or licensed TO PAY INTO THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND!" It's not just the money. "You want to now be subject to Federal forms, collections, and Audits in your little WISP operation?" This can be a huge amount of paperwork, maybe 2-3 days of an employee's time per month, and could easily turn your simple ISP service bills into a bunch of "junk fees" just like phone bills. Hughes has been around this track before. The best-known USF service is the "e-rate" subsidy, aimed at putting Internet access into schools. "Had the schools been able to use e-rate USF funds to BUY wireless equipment that could connect up their various cross-town schools together, then you wireless resellers could have supplied - on a one time purchase and installation basis - about 90% of ALL 16,000 school districts with internal zero-monthly-cost broadband connectivity." ILEC greed now means there are $4.75 billion in requests for e-rate funds, but only $2.25 billion available. All this means that right now you need to click on this link -- http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi. Type 02-33 under Proceedings, in the upper-left corner, to read the comments that have come in so far. You can also download the proceeding's text, so you'll know what you're talking about. (Take special note of Section IV (starts on page 36, or Paragraph 79 about "Other Broadband Platforms"). Next, click on http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi, fill in the form, then either type or upload your comments. Make them civil, make them to the point, and concentrate on how much further that money would go if it weren't under ILEC mismanagement. (The same procedure will let you comment on 96-45.) Do it now. You have until May 3 but if you leave this page you might forget. Do it now, and urge your largest customers to do it as well.

Want to Subsidize an ILEC? By Dana Blankenhorn ISPworld News The most important rulings in the history of ILEC-CLEC warfare are about to be made, and so far the FCC hasn't heard from you on it. The rulings are FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making in CC Docket No. 02-33 (NPRM 02-33), and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45 (FNPRM 96-45). The first would extend charges under the Universal Service Fee (USF) to wireless ISPs, including Wi-Fi operators in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz band. The second would change the way the USF is calculated, switching from a charge based on users to one based on bandwidth. The result would be a tax on broadband users, all broadband users, and this money would go directly to your ILEC competitors. That's because the rules under which the USF is disbursed mandate that they go to incumbent carriers if those carriers can, and agree to provide service. The carriers also get money directly for managing the fund - some are accused of putting 10% of the money directly into their own bank accounts, and keeping it there. Wi-Fi visionary Dave Hughes says he's amazed that no WISPs "filed ANYTHING on the FCC Web site against the FCC's 'proposed' forcing all telecommunications 'last mile' deliverers - DSL, Cable AND Wireless, whether no-license or licensed TO PAY INTO THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND!" It's not just the money. "You want to now be subject to Federal forms, collections, and Audits in your little WISP operation?" This can be a huge amount of paperwork, maybe 2-3 days of an employee's time per month, and could easily turn your simple ISP service bills into a bunch of "junk fees" just like phone bills. Hughes has been around this track before. The best-known USF service is the "e-rate" subsidy, aimed at putting Internet access into schools. "Had the schools been able to use e-rate USF funds to BUY wireless equipment that could connect up their various cross-town schools together, then you wireless resellers could have supplied - on a one time purchase and installation basis - about 90% of ALL 16,000 school districts with internal zero-monthly-cost broadband connectivity." ILEC greed now means there are $4.75 billion in requests for e-rate funds, but only $2.25 billion available. All this means that right now you need to click on this link -- http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi. Type 02-33 under Proceedings, in the upper-left corner, to read the comments that have come in so far. You can also download the proceeding's text, so you'll know what you're talking about. (Take special note of Section IV (starts on page 36, or Paragraph 79 about "Other Broadband Platforms"). Next, click on http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi, fill in the form, then either type or upload your comments. Make them civil, make them to the point, and concentrate on how much further that money would go if it weren't under ILEC mismanagement. (The same procedure will let you comment on 96-45.) Do it now. You have until May 3 but if you leave this page you might forget. Do it now, and urge your largest customers to do it as well.

Want to Subsidize an ILEC? By Dana Blankenhorn ISPworld News The most important rulings in the history of ILEC-CLEC warfare are about to be made, and so far the FCC hasn't heard from you on it. The rulings are FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making in CC Docket No. 02-33 (NPRM 02-33), and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45 (FNPRM 96-45). The first would extend charges under the Universal Service Fee (USF) to wireless ISPs, including Wi-Fi operators in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz band. The second would change the way the USF is calculated, switching from a charge based on users to one based on bandwidth. The result would be a tax on broadband users, all broadband users, and this money would go directly to your ILEC competitors. That's because the rules under which the USF is disbursed mandate that they go to incumbent carriers if those carriers can, and agree to provide service. The carriers also get money directly for managing the fund - some are accused of putting 10% of the money directly into their own bank accounts, and keeping it there. Wi-Fi visionary Dave Hughes says he's amazed that no WISPs "filed ANYTHING on the FCC Web site against the FCC's 'proposed' forcing all telecommunications 'last mile' deliverers - DSL, Cable AND Wireless, whether no-license or licensed TO PAY INTO THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND!" It's not just the money. "You want to now be subject to Federal forms, collections, and Audits in your little WISP operation?" This can be a huge amount of paperwork, maybe 2-3 days of an employee's time per month, and could easily turn your simple ISP service bills into a bunch of "junk fees" just like phone bills. Hughes has been around this track before. The best-known USF service is the "e-rate" subsidy, aimed at putting Internet access into schools. "Had the schools been able to use e-rate USF funds to BUY wireless equipment that could connect up their various cross-town schools together, then you wireless resellers could have supplied - on a one time purchase and installation basis - about 90% of ALL 16,000 school districts with internal zero-monthly-cost broadband connectivity." ILEC greed now means there are $4.75 billion in requests for e-rate funds, but only $2.25 billion available. All this means that right now you need to click on this link -- http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi. Type 02-33 under Proceedings, in the upper-left corner, to read the comments that have come in so far. You can also download the proceeding's text, so you'll know what you're talking about. (Take special note of Section IV (starts on page 36, or Paragraph 79 about "Other Broadband Platforms"). Next, click on http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi, fill in the form, then either type or upload your comments. Make them civil, make them to the point, and concentrate on how much further that money would go if it weren't under ILEC mismanagement. (The same procedure will let you comment on 96-45.) Do it now. You have until May 3 but if you leave this page you might forget. Do it now, and urge your largest customers to do it as well.

Want to Subsidize an ILEC? By Dana Blankenhorn ISPworld News The most important rulings in the history of ILEC-CLEC warfare are about to be made, and so far the FCC hasn't heard from you on it. The rulings are FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making in CC Docket No. 02-33 (NPRM 02-33), and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45 (FNPRM 96-45). The first would extend charges under the Universal Service Fee (USF) to wireless ISPs, including Wi-Fi operators in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz band. The second would change the way the USF is calculated, switching from a charge based on users to one based on bandwidth. The result would be a tax on broadband users, all broadband users, and this money would go directly to your ILEC competitors. That's because the rules under which the USF is disbursed mandate that they go to incumbent carriers if those carriers can, and agree to provide service. The carriers also get money directly for managing the fund - some are accused of putting 10% of the money directly into their own bank accounts, and keeping it there. Wi-Fi visionary Dave Hughes says he's amazed that no WISPs "filed ANYTHING on the FCC Web site against the FCC's 'proposed' forcing all telecommunications 'last mile' deliverers - DSL, Cable AND Wireless, whether no-license or licensed TO PAY INTO THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND!" It's not just the money. "You want to now be subject to Federal forms, collections, and Audits in your little WISP operation?" This can be a huge amount of paperwork, maybe 2-3 days of an employee's time per month, and could easily turn your simple ISP service bills into a bunch of "junk fees" just like phone bills. Hughes has been around this track before. The best-known USF service is the "e-rate" subsidy, aimed at putting Internet access into schools. "Had the schools been able to use e-rate USF funds to BUY wireless equipment that could connect up their various cross-town schools together, then you wireless resellers could have supplied - on a one time purchase and installation basis - about 90% of ALL 16,000 school districts with internal zero-monthly-cost broadband connectivity." ILEC greed now means there are $4.75 billion in requests for e-rate funds, but only $2.25 billion available. All this means that right now you need to click on this link -- http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi. Type 02-33 under Proceedings, in the upper-left corner, to read the comments that have come in so far. You can also download the proceeding's text, so you'll know what you're talking about. (Take special note of Section IV (starts on page 36, or Paragraph 79 about "Other Broadband Platforms"). Next, click on http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi, fill in the form, then either type or upload your comments. Make them civil, make them to the point, and concentrate on how much further that money would go if it weren't under ILEC mismanagement. (The same procedure will let you comment on 96-45.) Do it now. You have until May 3 but if you leave this page you might forget. Do it now, and urge your largest customers to do it as well.

Want to Subsidize an ILEC? By Dana Blankenhorn ISPworld News The most important rulings in the history of ILEC-CLEC warfare are about to be made, and so far the FCC hasn't heard from you on it. The rulings are FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making in CC Docket No. 02-33 (NPRM 02-33), and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45 (FNPRM 96-45). The first would extend charges under the Universal Service Fee (USF) to wireless ISPs, including Wi-Fi operators in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz band. The second would change the way the USF is calculated, switching from a charge based on users to one based on bandwidth. The result would be a tax on broadband users, all broadband users, and this money would go directly to your ILEC competitors. That's because the rules under which the USF is disbursed mandate that they go to incumbent carriers if those carriers can, and agree to provide service. The carriers also get money directly for managing the fund - some are accused of putting 10% of the money directly into their own bank accounts, and keeping it there. Wi-Fi visionary Dave Hughes says he's amazed that no WISPs "filed ANYTHING on the FCC Web site against the FCC's 'proposed' forcing all telecommunications 'last mile' deliverers - DSL, Cable AND Wireless, whether no-license or licensed TO PAY INTO THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND!" It's not just the money. "You want to now be subject to Federal forms, collections, and Audits in your little WISP operation?" This can be a huge amount of paperwork, maybe 2-3 days of an employee's time per month, and could easily turn your simple ISP service bills into a bunch of "junk fees" just like phone bills. Hughes has been around this track before. The best-known USF service is the "e-rate" subsidy, aimed at putting Internet access into schools. "Had the schools been able to use e-rate USF funds to BUY wireless equipment that could connect up their various cross-town schools together, then you wireless resellers could have supplied - on a one time purchase and installation basis - about 90% of ALL 16,000 school districts with internal zero-monthly-cost broadband connectivity." ILEC greed now means there are $4.75 billion in requests for e-rate funds, but only $2.25 billion available. All this means that right now you need to click on this link -- http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi. Type 02-33 under Proceedings, in the upper-left corner, to read the comments that have come in so far. You can also download the proceeding's text, so you'll know what you're talking about. (Take special note of Section IV (starts on page 36, or Paragraph 79 about "Other Broadband Platforms"). Next, click on http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi, fill in the form, then either type or upload your comments. Make them civil, make them to the point, and concentrate on how much further that money would go if it weren't under ILEC mismanagement. (The same procedure will let you comment on 96-45.) Do it now. You have until May 3 but if you leave this page you might forget. Do it now, and urge your largest customers to do it as well.

Want to Subsidize an ILEC? By Dana Blankenhorn ISPworld News The most important rulings in the history of ILEC-CLEC warfare are about to be made, and so far the FCC hasn't heard from you on it. The rulings are FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making in CC Docket No. 02-33 (NPRM 02-33), and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45 (FNPRM 96-45). The first would extend charges under the Universal Service Fee (USF) to wireless ISPs, including Wi-Fi operators in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz band. The second would change the way the USF is calculated, switching from a charge based on users to one based on bandwidth. The result would be a tax on broadband users, all broadband users, and this money would go directly to your ILEC competitors. That's because the rules under which the USF is disbursed mandate that they go to incumbent carriers if those carriers can, and agree to provide service. The carriers also get money directly for managing the fund - some are accused of putting 10% of the money directly into their own bank accounts, and keeping it there. Wi-Fi visionary Dave Hughes says he's amazed that no WISPs "filed ANYTHING on the FCC Web site against the FCC's 'proposed' forcing all telecommunications 'last mile' deliverers - DSL, Cable AND Wireless, whether no-license or licensed TO PAY INTO THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND!" It's not just the money. "You want to now be subject to Federal forms, collections, and Audits in your little WISP operation?" This can be a huge amount of paperwork, maybe 2-3 days of an employee's time per month, and could easily turn your simple ISP service bills into a bunch of "junk fees" just like phone bills. Hughes has been around this track before. The best-known USF service is the "e-rate" subsidy, aimed at putting Internet access into schools. "Had the schools been able to use e-rate USF funds to BUY wireless equipment that could connect up their various cross-town schools together, then you wireless resellers could have supplied - on a one time purchase and installation basis - about 90% of ALL 16,000 school districts with internal zero-monthly-cost broadband connectivity." ILEC greed now means there are $4.75 billion in requests for e-rate funds, but only $2.25 billion available. All this means that right now you need to click on this link -- http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi. Type 02-33 under Proceedings, in the upper-left corner, to read the comments that have come in so far. You can also download the proceeding's text, so you'll know what you're talking about. (Take special note of Section IV (starts on page 36, or Paragraph 79 about "Other Broadband Platforms"). Next, click on http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi, fill in the form, then either type or upload your comments. Make them civil, make them to the point, and concentrate on how much further that money would go if it weren't under ILEC mismanagement. (The same procedure will let you comment on 96-45.) Do it now. You have until May 3 but if you leave this page you might forget. Do it now, and urge your largest customers to do it as well.

Want to Subsidize an ILEC? By Dana Blankenhorn ISPworld News The most important rulings in the history of ILEC-CLEC warfare are about to be made, and so far the FCC hasn't heard from you on it. The rulings are FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making in CC Docket No. 02-33 (NPRM 02-33), and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45 (FNPRM 96-45). The first would extend charges under the Universal Service Fee (USF) to wireless ISPs, including Wi-Fi operators in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz band. The second would change the way the USF is calculated, switching from a charge based on users to one based on bandwidth. The result would be a tax on broadband users, all broadband users, and this money would go directly to your ILEC competitors. That's because the rules under which the USF is disbursed mandate that they go to incumbent carriers if those carriers can, and agree to provide service. The carriers also get money directly for managing the fund - some are accused of putting 10% of the money directly into their own bank accounts, and keeping it there. Wi-Fi visionary Dave Hughes says he's amazed that no WISPs "filed ANYTHING on the FCC Web site against the FCC's 'proposed' forcing all telecommunications 'last mile' deliverers - DSL, Cable AND Wireless, whether no-license or licensed TO PAY INTO THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND!" It's not just the money. "You want to now be subject to Federal forms, collections, and Audits in your little WISP operation?" This can be a huge amount of paperwork, maybe 2-3 days of an employee's time per month, and could easily turn your simple ISP service bills into a bunch of "junk fees" just like phone bills. Hughes has been around this track before. The best-known USF service is the "e-rate" subsidy, aimed at putting Internet access into schools. "Had the schools been able to use e-rate USF funds to BUY wireless equipment that could connect up their various cross-town schools together, then you wireless resellers could have supplied - on a one time purchase and installation basis - about 90% of ALL 16,000 school districts with internal zero-monthly-cost broadband connectivity." ILEC greed now means there are $4.75 billion in requests for e-rate funds, but only $2.25 billion available. All this means that right now you need to click on this link -- http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi. Type 02-33 under Proceedings, in the upper-left corner, to read the comments that have come in so far. You can also download the proceeding's text, so you'll know what you're talking about. (Take special note of Section IV (starts on page 36, or Paragraph 79 about "Other Broadband Platforms"). Next, click on http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi, fill in the form, then either type or upload your comments. Make them civil, make them to the point, and concentrate on how much further that money would go if it weren't under ILEC mismanagement. (The same procedure will let you comment on 96-45.) Do it now. You have until May 3 but if you leave this page you might forget. Do it now, and urge your largest customers to do it as well.

Want to Subsidize an ILEC? By Dana Blankenhorn ISPworld News The most important rulings in the history of ILEC-CLEC warfare are about to be made, and so far the FCC hasn't heard from you on it. The rulings are FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making in CC Docket No. 02-33 (NPRM 02-33), and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45 (FNPRM 96-45). The first would extend charges under the Universal Service Fee (USF) to wireless ISPs, including Wi-Fi operators in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz band. The second would change the way the USF is calculated, switching from a charge based on users to one based on bandwidth. The result would be a tax on broadband users, all broadband users, and this money would go directly to your ILEC competitors. That's because the rules under which the USF is disbursed mandate that they go to incumbent carriers if those carriers can, and agree to provide service. The carriers also get money directly for managing the fund - some are accused of putting 10% of the money directly into their own bank accounts, and keeping it there. Wi-Fi visionary Dave Hughes says he's amazed that no WISPs "filed ANYTHING on the FCC Web site against the FCC's 'proposed' forcing all telecommunications 'last mile' deliverers - DSL, Cable AND Wireless, whether no-license or licensed TO PAY INTO THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND!" It's not just the money. "You want to now be subject to Federal forms, collections, and Audits in your little WISP operation?" This can be a huge amount of paperwork, maybe 2-3 days of an employee's time per month, and could easily turn your simple ISP service bills into a bunch of "junk fees" just like phone bills. Hughes has been around this track before. The best-known USF service is the "e-rate" subsidy, aimed at putting Internet access into schools. "Had the schools been able to use e-rate USF funds to BUY wireless equipment that could connect up their various cross-town schools together, then you wireless resellers could have supplied - on a one time purchase and installation basis - about 90% of ALL 16,000 school districts with internal zero-monthly-cost broadband connectivity." ILEC greed now means there are $4.75 billion in requests for e-rate funds, but only $2.25 billion available. All this means that right now you need to click on this link -- http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi. Type 02-33 under Proceedings, in the upper-left corner, to read the comments that have come in so far. You can also download the proceeding's text, so you'll know what you're talking about. (Take special note of Section IV (starts on page 36, or Paragraph 79 about "Other Broadband Platforms"). Next, click on http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi, fill in the form, then either type or upload your comments. Make them civil, make them to the point, and concentrate on how much further that money would go if it weren't under ILEC mismanagement. (The same procedure will let you comment on 96-45.) Do it now. You have until May 3 but if you leave this page you might forget. Do it now, and urge your largest customers to do it as well.

Want to Subsidize an ILEC? By Dana Blankenhorn ISPworld News The most important rulings in the history of ILEC-CLEC warfare are about to be made, and so far the FCC hasn't heard from you on it. The rulings are FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making in CC Docket No. 02-33 (NPRM 02-33), and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45 (FNPRM 96-45). The first would extend charges under the Universal Service Fee (USF) to wireless ISPs, including Wi-Fi operators in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz band. The second would change the way the USF is calculated, switching from a charge based on users to one based on bandwidth. The result would be a tax on broadband users, all broadband users, and this money would go directly to your ILEC competitors. That's because the rules under which the USF is disbursed mandate that they go to incumbent carriers if those carriers can, and agree to provide service. The carriers also get money directly for managing the fund - some are accused of putting 10% of the money directly into their own bank accounts, and keeping it there. Wi-Fi visionary Dave Hughes says he's amazed that no WISPs "filed ANYTHING on the FCC Web site against the FCC's 'proposed' forcing all telecommunications 'last mile' deliverers - DSL, Cable AND Wireless, whether no-license or licensed TO PAY INTO THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND!" It's not just the money. "You want to now be subject to Federal forms, collections, and Audits in your little WISP operation?" This can be a huge amount of paperwork, maybe 2-3 days of an employee's time per month, and could easily turn your simple ISP service bills into a bunch of "junk fees" just like phone bills. Hughes has been around this track before. The best-known USF service is the "e-rate" subsidy, aimed at putting Internet access into schools. "Had the schools been able to use e-rate USF funds to BUY wireless equipment that could connect up their various cross-town schools together, then you wireless resellers could have supplied - on a one time purchase and installation basis - about 90% of ALL 16,000 school districts with internal zero-monthly-cost broadband connectivity." ILEC greed now means there are $4.75 billion in requests for e-rate funds, but only $2.25 billion available. All this means that right now you need to click on this link -- http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi. Type 02-33 under Proceedings, in the upper-left corner, to read the comments that have come in so far. You can also download the proceeding's text, so you'll know what you're talking about. (Take special note of Section IV (starts on page 36, or Paragraph 79 about "Other Broadband Platforms"). Next, click on http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi, fill in the form, then either type or upload your comments. Make them civil, make them to the point, and concentrate on how much further that money would go if it weren't under ILEC mismanagement. (The same procedure will let you comment on 96-45.) Do it now. You have until May 3 but if you leave this page you might forget. Do it now, and urge your largest customers to do it as well.

Want to Subsidize an ILEC? By Dana Blankenhorn ISPworld News The most important rulings in the history of ILEC-CLEC warfare are about to be made, and so far the FCC hasn't heard from you on it. The rulings are FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making in CC Docket No. 02-33 (NPRM 02-33), and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45 (FNPRM 96-45). The first would extend charges under the Universal Service Fee (USF) to wireless ISPs, including Wi-Fi operators in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz band. The second would change the way the USF is calculated, switching from a charge based on users to one based on bandwidth. The result would be a tax on broadband users, all broadband users, and this money would go directly to your ILEC competitors. That's because the rules under which the USF is disbursed mandate that they go to incumbent carriers if those carriers can, and agree to provide service. The carriers also get money directly for managing the fund - some are accused of putting 10% of the money directly into their own bank accounts, and keeping it there. Wi-Fi visionary Dave Hughes says he's amazed that no WISPs "filed ANYTHING on the FCC Web site against the FCC's 'proposed' forcing all telecommunications 'last mile' deliverers - DSL, Cable AND Wireless, whether no-license or licensed TO PAY INTO THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND!" It's not just the money. "You want to now be subject to Federal forms, collections, and Audits in your little WISP operation?" This can be a huge amount of paperwork, maybe 2-3 days of an employee's time per month, and could easily turn your simple ISP service bills into a bunch of "junk fees" just like phone bills. Hughes has been around this track before. The best-known USF service is the "e-rate" subsidy, aimed at putting Internet access into schools. "Had the schools been able to use e-rate USF funds to BUY wireless equipment that could connect up their various cross-town schools together, then you wireless resellers could have supplied - on a one time purchase and installation basis - about 90% of ALL 16,000 school districts with internal zero-monthly-cost broadband connectivity." ILEC greed now means there are $4.75 billion in requests for e-rate funds, but only $2.25 billion available. All this means that right now you need to click on this link -- http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi. Type 02-33 under Proceedings, in the upper-left corner, to read the comments that have come in so far. You can also download the proceeding's text, so you'll know what you're talking about. (Take special note of Section IV (starts on page 36, or Paragraph 79 about "Other Broadband Platforms"). Next, click on http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi, fill in the form, then either type or upload your comments. Make them civil, make them to the point, and concentrate on how much further that money would go if it weren't under ILEC mismanagement. (The same procedure will let you comment on 96-45.) Do it now. You have until May 3 but if you leave this page you might forget. Do it now, and urge your largest customers to do it as well.

Want to Subsidize an ILEC? By Dana Blankenhorn ISPworld News The most important rulings in the history of ILEC-CLEC warfare are about to be made, and so far the FCC hasn't heard from you on it. The rulings are FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making in CC Docket No. 02-33 (NPRM 02-33), and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45 (FNPRM 96-45). The first would extend charges under the Universal Service Fee (USF) to wireless ISPs, including Wi-Fi operators in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz band. The second would change the way the USF is calculated, switching from a charge based on users to one based on bandwidth. The result would be a tax on broadband users, all broadband users, and this money would go directly to your ILEC competitors. That's because the rules under which the USF is disbursed mandate that they go to incumbent carriers if those carriers can, and agree to provide service. The carriers also get money directly for managing the fund - some are accused of putting 10% of the money directly into their own bank accounts, and keeping it there. Wi-Fi visionary Dave Hughes says he's amazed that no WISPs "filed ANYTHING on the FCC Web site against the FCC's 'proposed' forcing all telecommunications 'last mile' deliverers - DSL, Cable AND Wireless, whether no-license or licensed TO PAY INTO THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND!" It's not just the money. "You want to now be subject to Federal forms, collections, and Audits in your little WISP operation?" This can be a huge amount of paperwork, maybe 2-3 days of an employee's time per month, and could easily turn your simple ISP service bills into a bunch of "junk fees" just like phone bills. Hughes has been around this track before. The best-known USF service is the "e-rate" subsidy, aimed at putting Internet access into schools. "Had the schools been able to use e-rate USF funds to BUY wireless equipment that could connect up their various cross-town schools together, then you wireless resellers could have supplied - on a one time purchase and installation basis - about 90% of ALL 16,000 school districts with internal zero-monthly-cost broadband connectivity." ILEC greed now means there are $4.75 billion in requests for e-rate funds, but only $2.25 billion available. All this means that right now you need to click on this link -- http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi. Type 02-33 under Proceedings, in the upper-left corner, to read the comments that have come in so far. You can also download the proceeding's text, so you'll know what you're talking about. (Take special note of Section IV (starts on page 36, or Paragraph 79 about "Other Broadband Platforms"). Next, click on http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi, fill in the form, then either type or upload your comments. Make them civil, make them to the point, and concentrate on how much further that money would go if it weren't under ILEC mismanagement. (The same procedure will let you comment on 96-45.) Do it now. You have until May 3 but if you leave this page you might forget. Do it now, and urge your largest customers to do it as well.

Want to Subsidize an ILEC? By Dana Blankenhorn ISPworld News The most important rulings in the history of ILEC-CLEC warfare are about to be made, and so far the FCC hasn't heard from you on it. The rulings are FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making in CC Docket No. 02-33 (NPRM 02-33), and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45 (FNPRM 96-45). The first would extend charges under the Universal Service Fee (USF) to wireless ISPs, including Wi-Fi operators in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz band. The second would change the way the USF is calculated, switching from a charge based on users to one based on bandwidth. The result would be a tax on broadband users, all broadband users, and this money would go directly to your ILEC competitors. That's because the rules under which the USF is disbursed mandate that they go to incumbent carriers if those carriers can, and agree to provide service. The carriers also get money directly for managing the fund - some are accused of putting 10% of the money directly into their own bank accounts, and keeping it there. Wi-Fi visionary Dave Hughes says he's amazed that no WISPs "filed ANYTHING on the FCC Web site against the FCC's 'proposed' forcing all telecommunications 'last mile' deliverers - DSL, Cable AND Wireless, whether no-license or licensed TO PAY INTO THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND!" It's not just the money. "You want to now be subject to Federal forms, collections, and Audits in your little WISP operation?" This can be a huge amount of paperwork, maybe 2-3 days of an employee's time per month, and could easily turn your simple ISP service bills into a bunch of "junk fees" just like phone bills. Hughes has been around this track before. The best-known USF service is the "e-rate" subsidy, aimed at putting Internet access into schools. "Had the schools been able to use e-rate USF funds to BUY wireless equipment that could connect up their various cross-town schools together, then you wireless resellers could have supplied - on a one time purchase and installation basis - about 90% of ALL 16,000 school districts with internal zero-monthly-cost broadband connectivity." ILEC greed now means there are $4.75 billion in requests for e-rate funds, but only $2.25 billion available. All this means that right now you need to click on this link -- http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi. Type 02-33 under Proceedings, in the upper-left corner, to read the comments that have come in so far. You can also download the proceeding's text, so you'll know what you're talking about. (Take special note of Section IV (starts on page 36, or Paragraph 79 about "Other Broadband Platforms"). Next, click on http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi, fill in the form, then either type or upload your comments. Make them civil, make them to the point, and concentrate on how much further that money would go if it weren't under ILEC mismanagement. (The same procedure will let you comment on 96-45.) Do it now. You have until May 3 but if you leave this page you might forget. Do it now, and urge your largest customers to do it as well.

Want to Subsidize an ILEC? By Dana Blankenhorn ISPworld News The most important rulings in the history of ILEC-CLEC warfare are about to be made, and so far the FCC hasn't heard from you on it. The rulings are FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making in CC Docket No. 02-33 (NPRM 02-33), and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45 (FNPRM 96-45). The first would extend charges under the Universal Service Fee (USF) to wireless ISPs, including Wi-Fi operators in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz band. The second would change the way the USF is calculated, switching from a charge based on users to one based on bandwidth. The result would be a tax on broadband users, all broadband users, and this money would go directly to your ILEC competitors. That's because the rules under which the USF is disbursed mandate that they go to incumbent carriers if those carriers can, and agree to provide service. The carriers also get money directly for managing the fund - some are accused of putting 10% of the money directly into their own bank accounts, and keeping it there. Wi-Fi visionary Dave Hughes says he's amazed that no WISPs "filed ANYTHING on the FCC Web site against the FCC's 'proposed' forcing all telecommunications 'last mile' deliverers - DSL, Cable AND Wireless, whether no-license or licensed TO PAY INTO THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND!" It's not just the money. "You want to now be subject to Federal forms, collections, and Audits in your little WISP operation?" This can be a huge amount of paperwork, maybe 2-3 days of an employee's time per month, and could easily turn your simple ISP service bills into a bunch of "junk fees" just like phone bills. Hughes has been around this track before. The best-known USF service is the "e-rate" subsidy, aimed at putting Internet access into schools. "Had the schools been able to use e-rate USF funds to BUY wireless equipment that could connect up their various cross-town schools together, then you wireless resellers could have supplied - on a one time purchase and installation basis - about 90% of ALL 16,000 school districts with internal zero-monthly-cost broadband connectivity." ILEC greed now means there are $4.75 billion in requests for e-rate funds, but only $2.25 billion available. All this means that right now you need to click on this link -- http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi. Type 02-33 under Proceedings, in the upper-left corner, to read the comments that have come in so far. You can also download the proceeding's text, so you'll know what you're talking about. (Take special note of Section IV (starts on page 36, or Paragraph 79 about "Other Broadband Platforms"). Next, click on http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi, fill in the form, then either type or upload your comments. Make them civil, make them to the point, and concentrate on how much further that money would go if it weren't under ILEC mismanagement. (The same procedure will let you comment on 96-45.) Do it now. You have until May 3 but if you leave this page you might forget. Do it now, and urge your largest customers to do it as well.

Want to Subsidize an ILEC? By Dana Blankenhorn ISPworld News The most important rulings in the history of ILEC-CLEC warfare are about to be made, and so far the FCC hasn't heard from you on it. The rulings are FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making in CC Docket No. 02-33 (NPRM 02-33), and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45 (FNPRM 96-45). The first would extend charges under the Universal Service Fee (USF) to wireless ISPs, including Wi-Fi operators in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz band. The second would change the way the USF is calculated, switching from a charge based on users to one based on bandwidth. The result would be a tax on broadband users, all broadband users, and this money would go directly to your ILEC competitors. That's because the rules under which the USF is disbursed mandate that they go to incumbent carriers if those carriers can, and agree to provide service. The carriers also get money directly for managing the fund - some are accused of putting 10% of the money directly into their own bank accounts, and keeping it there. Wi-Fi visionary Dave Hughes says he's amazed that no WISPs "filed ANYTHING on the FCC Web site against the FCC's 'proposed' forcing all telecommunications 'last mile' deliverers - DSL, Cable AND Wireless, whether no-license or licensed TO PAY INTO THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND!" It's not just the money. "You want to now be subject to Federal forms, collections, and Audits in your little WISP operation?" This can be a huge amount of paperwork, maybe 2-3 days of an employee's time per month, and could easily turn your simple ISP service bills into a bunch of "junk fees" just like phone bills. Hughes has been around this track before. The best-known USF service is the "e-rate" subsidy, aimed at putting Internet access into schools. "Had the schools been able to use e-rate USF funds to BUY wireless equipment that could connect up their various cross-town schools together, then you wireless resellers could have supplied - on a one time purchase and installation basis - about 90% of ALL 16,000 school districts with internal zero-monthly-cost broadband connectivity." ILEC greed now means there are $4.75 billion in requests for e-rate funds, but only $2.25 billion available. All this means that right now you need to click on this link -- http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi. Type 02-33 under Proceedings, in the upper-left corner, to read the comments that have come in so far. You can also download the proceeding's text, so you'll know what you're talking about. (Take special note of Section IV (starts on page 36, or Paragraph 79 about "Other Broadband Platforms"). Next, click on http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi, fill in the form, then either type or upload your comments. Make them civil, make them to the point, and concentrate on how much further that money would go if it weren't under ILEC mismanagement. (The same procedure will let you comment on 96-45.) Do it now. You have until May 3 but if you leave this page you might forget. Do it now, and urge your largest customers to do it as well.