Well, that should be simple. If you are a user, you call Technical Support. If you are an admin from another ISP, a good first step would be contacting them via the information in whois, however this is usually contact information for Technical Support or an abuse department for major ISPs. Another good way might be posting in newsgroups for the ISP, I know that @Home has staff monitoring the @Home newsgroups...
This scares the life out of me. The CRTC has no clue whatsoever about the real world, its a facist organization from hell. My opinion... but my tax dollars help fund their idiocy. The biggest problem I see with CRTC action being motivated by complaints from customers is just that. Customers. Customers who view a failure in routing within some other backbone providers' network as the fault of their ISP. Customers who blow failures out of proportion for their own benefit. Don't get me wrong, I know there are some MASSIVE problems with Rogers@Home (the GlobeandMail.com site is a great research tool for this.. just search for Excite or Rogers or Shaw)... but many people making complaints to the CRTC about "poor service" don't care whose fault it is. They simply want to blame the ISP as a catch-all, and that's wrong.
It also scares me that the CRTC will listen. They don't care about fault either, they simply want to mandate and legislate. Government intervention will be the death of freedom on the Internet, and it will be the death of many Internet businesses.
That being said, I have it relatively easy. Rogers customers are apparently getting assraped. I live in a Shaw@Home city, and my service is pretty damn good. Too good for $39.95/month. That's very little money for the kind of bandwidth I get. Its annoying hearing people complaint about how expensive that is. They don't know how good they have it... the impression that comes to mind is "spoiled brats".
Bah. Firstly, DHCP is meant to be dynamic. @Home's implimentation merely automatically configures customers' machines to minimize the Bonehead User Factor. The thing is, the IPs are largely static, and the IPs are from the well known 24 blocks in use by cable broadband providers all over North America. Its a prime hunting ground for hackers.
That being said, many cable modem brands actually support encryption inherent to their functionality, so they are more secure in many cases that a simple little xDSL modem. I work with both technologies, and know each fairly well from both a network admin and operations perspective. The main point that shouldn't be forgotten is that is users operate their computers properly there will rarely have problems. That means no wide open File and Printer Sharing, don't be a slut with your email (if you randomly open attachments then you deserve what you get - including Back Orifice), take a little initiative to keep abreast of the goings on in the computer world, use a virus scanner, etc. The problem isn't broadband Internet access, the problem is users with poor habits. There is no reason to slam E@H for these statements even though they may be a little naive - users have to take some responsibility for themselves, dammit.
Interesting point. Now, consider this: NT is POSIX compliant, at least to a limited degree. POSIX command line applications will run in the NT "shell". The NT kernel, unlike the excuse for an OS that is the Win95 family, does some stuff behind the scenes that is hidden from the user, and those things look very UNIXish.
Re:Broadband ISP's need different rules
on
@Home UDP Lifted
·
· Score: 1
@Home installing Wingate? Not possible. The @Home software in and of itself does not include anything of the sort, in fact some interpretations of the @Home AUP consider Wingate a violation and grounds for sanctions or termination of service. If any particular member cableco of @Home is doing something so idiotic as installing Wingate, I would *love* to know which.
True, Wingate may be more intelligently configured nowadays by default. Still, a great concern has to be users who abdicate responsibility over the security of their own computer. Anyone who blindly lets anyone install software on their machine without being aware of what was installed is still responsible for any activities that machine is used for.
Re:"Self-appointed administrators"?
on
@Home UDP Lifted
·
· Score: 3
Furthermore, that is how Usenet works. It used to be how the Internet worked, more or less. The fact is, its the admins who own the boxes, and they have the right to decide which packets they accept.
There is this frightening misconception among some naive users that they have a right to send email, post whatever they wish, etc, but they forget that someone elses property has to be involved in propagating their material. This translates to the use of the network and associated services being a PRIVALEDGE, not a RIGHT.
What about free speech? Well, everone still should have the freedom to say what they want, however they don't have to freedom to force others to carry the message and distribute it.
Re:Broadband ISP's need different rules
on
@Home UDP Lifted
·
· Score: 1
Heheh.. the main problem seems to be cluebies running open proxies like Wingate. You have to love the default security of this brilliant Windows application:
The UDP never went into effect. What David Ritz called for in the UDP posting 5 days ago was a Request for Discussion of implementing the UDP against Excite@Home. No sanctions were actually put in place. The reduction in spam was due to @Home's response and crackdown, as evident in the NANAU group postings from @Home.
The amounts of Usenet spam coming out of machines at the end of cable modems was reduced drastically during the last few days. All the details on this can be found in NANAU.
I personally have absolutely no sympathy for Anthony LaForge. Actually, I'm having this strange urge to email him and let him know how idiotic I think trying to register e-.com is. I wish him much inconvenience...
Gotta love this disclaimer on that "press release": Certain information included in this communication (as well as information included in oral statements or other written statements made or to be made by AbsoluteFuture.com) contains statements that are forward-looking. Such as statements relating to the future anticipated direction of the Internet industry, plans for future expansion, various business development activities, planned capital expenditures, future funding resources, anticipated sales growth and potential contracts. These forward statements are subject to a number of known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual operations or results to differ materially from those anticipated. The NASD has not reviewed and does not accept responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this news release.
Its interesting to me that people who actually do or have worked in tech support read User Friendly with a special kind of awe: its is a comic strip which almost seems to speak to every experience had on a help desk, from the amazingly ignorant user who calls to have their problem solved time and again (this is not someone who learns, this is someone who REFUSES to learn and expects the egghead on call to do their thinking FOR THEM), to the quasi-sentient technology which helps to make life hell. User Friendly is brilliant. I also have the theory that there are likely many people who find it offensive or crass simply because they are the user on the other end of the jokes. Ask most people in tech support what they think of end-users who actually admit that they lack knownledge and then try to address that issue by learning, and you'll find the utmost respect and appreciation is held. Ask those same techs what they think of the user who calls repeatedly with the same question, or questions which could have been solved on their own with a little bit of reading of well-publicized documentation, and you'll find the healthy sarcasm which keeps those with clue relatively sane. Remember, those without clue have no right to demand that those with clue help or solve problems for them, and this is often the problem in a tech support atmosphere - the end-user demands assistance rather than humbly requesting it.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, that should be simple. If you are a user, you call Technical Support. If you are an admin from another ISP, a good first step would be contacting them via the information in whois, however this is usually contact information for Technical Support or an abuse department for major ISPs. Another good way might be posting in newsgroups for the ISP, I know that @Home has staff monitoring the @Home newsgroups...
This scares the life out of me. The CRTC has no clue whatsoever about the real world, its a facist organization from hell. My opinion... but my tax dollars help fund their idiocy. The biggest problem I see with CRTC action being motivated by complaints from customers is just that. Customers. Customers who view a failure in routing within some other backbone providers' network as the fault of their ISP. Customers who blow failures out of proportion for their own benefit. Don't get me wrong, I know there are some MASSIVE problems with Rogers@Home (the GlobeandMail.com site is a great research tool for this.. just search for Excite or Rogers or Shaw)... but many people making complaints to the CRTC about "poor service" don't care whose fault it is. They simply want to blame the ISP as a catch-all, and that's wrong.
It also scares me that the CRTC will listen. They don't care about fault either, they simply want to mandate and legislate. Government intervention will be the death of freedom on the Internet, and it will be the death of many Internet businesses.
That being said, I have it relatively easy. Rogers customers are apparently getting assraped. I live in a Shaw@Home city, and my service is pretty damn good. Too good for $39.95/month. That's very little money for the kind of bandwidth I get. Its annoying hearing people complaint about how expensive that is. They don't know how good they have it... the impression that comes to mind is "spoiled brats".
... my 2 cents.
Its your own fault.
That being said, many cable modem brands actually support encryption inherent to their functionality, so they are more secure in many cases that a simple little xDSL modem. I work with both technologies, and know each fairly well from both a network admin and operations perspective. The main point that shouldn't be forgotten is that is users operate their computers properly there will rarely have problems. That means no wide open File and Printer Sharing, don't be a slut with your email (if you randomly open attachments then you deserve what you get - including Back Orifice), take a little initiative to keep abreast of the goings on in the computer world, use a virus scanner, etc. The problem isn't broadband Internet access, the problem is users with poor habits. There is no reason to slam E@H for these statements even though they may be a little naive - users have to take some responsibility for themselves, dammit.
Interesting point. Now, consider this:
NT is POSIX compliant, at least to a limited degree. POSIX command line applications will run in the NT "shell". The NT kernel, unlike the excuse for an OS that is the Win95 family, does some stuff behind the scenes that is hidden from the user, and those things look very UNIXish.
@Home installing Wingate? Not possible. The @Home software in and of itself does not include anything of the sort, in fact some interpretations of the @Home AUP consider Wingate a violation and grounds for sanctions or termination of service. If any particular member cableco of @Home is doing something so idiotic as installing Wingate, I would *love* to know which.
True, Wingate may be more intelligently configured nowadays by default. Still, a great concern has to be users who abdicate responsibility over the security of their own computer. Anyone who blindly lets anyone install software on their machine without being aware of what was installed is still responsible for any activities that machine is used for.
Furthermore, that is how Usenet works. It used to be how the Internet worked, more or less. The fact is, its the admins who own the boxes, and they have the right to decide which packets they accept.
There is this frightening misconception among some naive users that they have a right to send email, post whatever they wish, etc, but they forget that someone elses property has to be involved in propagating their material. This translates to the use of the network and associated services being a PRIVALEDGE, not a RIGHT.
What about free speech? Well, everone still should have the freedom to say what they want, however they don't have to freedom to force others to carry the message and distribute it.
Heheh.. the main problem seems to be cluebies running open proxies like Wingate. You have to love the default security of this brilliant Windows application:
- wide open with no logging
Thank you Wingate!
You are probably getting spam with spoofed @home reply-to addresses. Read your email headers to find out who is actually responsible.
Either way, if you send in a report to abuse@home.net and include the full headers of the email, it should be dealt with...
The UDP never went into effect. What David Ritz called for in the UDP posting 5 days ago was a Request for Discussion of implementing the UDP against Excite@Home. No sanctions were actually put in place. The reduction in spam was due to @Home's response and crackdown, as evident in the NANAU group postings from @Home.
The amounts of Usenet spam coming out of machines at the end of cable modems was reduced drastically during the last few days. All the details on this can be found in NANAU.
I personally have absolutely no sympathy for Anthony LaForge. Actually, I'm having this strange urge to email him and let him know how idiotic I think trying to register e-.com is. I wish him much inconvenience...
Gotta love this disclaimer on that "press release":
Certain information included in this communication (as well as information included in oral statements or other written statements made or to be made by AbsoluteFuture.com) contains statements that are forward-looking. Such as statements relating to the future anticipated direction of the Internet industry, plans for future expansion, various business development activities, planned capital expenditures, future funding resources, anticipated sales growth and potential contracts. These forward statements are subject to a number of known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual operations or results to differ materially from those anticipated. The NASD has not reviewed and does not accept responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this news release.
Its interesting to me that people who actually do or have worked in tech support read User Friendly with a special kind of awe: its is a comic strip which almost seems to speak to every experience had on a help desk, from the amazingly ignorant user who calls to have their problem solved time and again (this is not someone who learns, this is someone who REFUSES to learn and expects the egghead on call to do their thinking FOR THEM), to the quasi-sentient technology which helps to make life hell. User Friendly is brilliant. I also have the theory that there are likely many people who find it offensive or crass simply because they are the user on the other end of the jokes. Ask most people in tech support what they think of end-users who actually admit that they lack knownledge and then try to address that issue by learning, and you'll find the utmost respect and appreciation is held. Ask those same techs what they think of the user who calls repeatedly with the same question, or questions which could have been solved on their own with a little bit of reading of well-publicized documentation, and you'll find the healthy sarcasm which keeps those with clue relatively sane. Remember, those without clue have no right to demand that those with clue help or solve problems for them, and this is often the problem in a tech support atmosphere - the end-user demands assistance rather than humbly requesting it.