Archive for the 'blogging' Category

Meta-blog Reminder

ø

Everyone should go visit the Blogging Group’s Meta-blog. So far only one class member outside the group has left a comment. So click here, visit the meta-blog, and leave comments. It will tell you whether Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton monitor the comments on their blogs, how to turn your blog into a book deal, and even direct you to other blogs about blogging (since we know you just can’t get enough blogging goodness). Do it, you’ll love it.

Live Blog @ the FCC (Part 2)

ø

4:39 – P. Clark: This isn’t a short term problem. The last mile to the home is always going to be expensive.

C. Adelstein: Where is the line between good and bad discrimination?

BT: I know it when I see it, and Comcast is bad.

P. Bennett: There wasn’t any data from Comcast. But, discrimination might be ok when the network is crowded, but it isn’t ok when it isn’t crowded.

P. Clark: If the network is spoofing packets that look they come from somewhere else that seems particularly troublesome.

Smyers: When there is industry consensus on a solution we don’t need to look any deeper. But when solutions don’t comply with industry standards then it needs a deeper look.

4:22 – C. Cobb: We don’t even have the questions, so how can we have the answers?

C. Martin: If we do not have enough information, should we not take any action? P. Clark: Some disclosure might be good and start a dialog with industry. We also do know enough about the current actions to decide if they violate the IPS or not.

C. Adelstein: Are our network management practices having an impact on innovation here? A: There is a lot going on in Asia now.

P. Clark: The networks today contain ways of regulating traffic. The Comcast response is a very nuanced response to traffic. The network today allows me to go really fast when nobody else is there (this is good), but then when lots of people are there I need to slow down. The question is thus how should we slow down when we have to b/c it isn’t feasible to build a network where we can all always go at full speed.

__(‘Read the rest of this entry »’)

Live Blogging the FCC Hearing

3

In case you came here from an outside link, I’ve continued after lunch in a second post.

2:18 – Really break for lunch.

2:13 – 15 minute break for lunch (which will make us only 15 mins behind schedule but also very hungy).

Oh wait, two more questions from C. Martin. Does the FCC have the authority to enforce network neutrality principles? Verizon: Yes, the FCC has asserted it. Comcast: IPS isn’t enforceable. FCC doesn’t have authority to impose a fine right now.

2:09 – Only network operator can provide VoIP in Korea for example. There are good stories and bad stories about Asia. P. Yoo: They do network management in Europe and Asia even though they have more bandwidth.

1:51 – Justice Scalia’s Pizza Delivery Model? Ok that sounds cool but what is it? Help please!

P. Wu: We can have non-discrimination system, it is just going to be expensive. Problem is that 500 people share a node that can’t handle 500 operating at max lawful speed. This becomes very expensive. Thus network management is a way to build out to rural areas more efficiently. The public safety solution at 700 MHz is similar.

P. Wu: There is some discrimination going on all the time. That is ok. But what is dangerous is having the carriers pick and choose certain applications. Anti-competitive discrimination is bad.

C. McDowell(aka the funny one apparently): Does the BT style of P2P cause customers to consume more bandwidth than they are paying for? Comcast: P2P during network congestion cause degradation that is a violation of our usage policy. We don’t sell a particular amount of bandwidth. We provide a service up to a certain amount subject to condition that customer doesn’t degrade other customers.

C. McDowell: If lots of people in my neighborhood want to use BT am I exceeding my limits? Comcast: You are exceeding what you contracted for.

C. McDowell: Discrimination is sometimes ok, but we need to be concerned about is anti-competitive discrimination. FP: This would be less of a concern if it wasn’t anti-competitive, but it would still have negative effects that are important.

C. Far SL: What would happen if you didn’t do what you do? Comcast: Everyone would feel a degradation in their service. BT users might not even see a difference b/c of the resulting congestion.

P. Benkler: Simple requirement of disclosure might not be enough…

__(‘Read the rest of this entry »’)

Web’s capillary action

2

I haven’t tried this software yet, but I like how they’re developing it:

The concept of Jing is the always-ready program that instantly captures and shares images and video…from your computer to anywhere.

It’s something we want to give you, along with some online media hosting, to see how you use it. The project will eventually turn into something else. Tell us what you think so we can figure out what that is.

Try it, you’ll like it. Find out more in the FAQ, or on the weblog .


Not so incidentally, I found out about this via a post by JP Rangaswami following up on a really terrific post about the incredible capacity of our new circulatory system (capillaries, not a fire hose, says JP). The follow-up post gives an example of capillary action at work. The first post frames the Net as how conversation — taken not just as chin-wagging but as how much of the the work and play of sociality are accomplished — scales. [Tags: ]