Re: Problem with Flash plug-in. - Mozilla

This is a discussion on Re: Problem with Flash plug-in. - Mozilla ; Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote: > Gus Richter wrote: >> The Real Bev wrote: >>> Gus Richter wrote: >>> >>>> squaredancer wrote: >>>>> hi Bev! you been on vacation, sick, hospital or someplace without >>>>> electricity?? haven't seen you ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 41 to 49 of 49

Thread: Re: Problem with Flash plug-in.

  1. Re: Problem with Flash plug-in.

    Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
    > Gus Richter wrote:
    >> The Real Bev wrote:
    >>> Gus Richter wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> squaredancer wrote:
    >>>>> hi Bev! you been on vacation, sick, hospital or someplace without
    >>>>> electricity?? haven't seen you for a long time now!
    >>>> Hmmmm?
    >>>>
    >>> I didn't look like that even when I might have been expected to! So
    >>> which of you guys has signed up?

    >>
    >> Actually, I'm not in the UK and don't have Virgin Media as my ISP.
    >> On the other hand, I believe that most ISPs are either doing the same
    >> or are looking at this.
    >>

    >
    > no, now they're into throttling, for example:
    > http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...8c&k=85066&p=1


    Exactly. "Throttling" is the term to use. You pay for something, but
    they throttle you depending on time of day, what they believe your use
    may be, and other reasons they come up with. All this in order to save
    their bandwidth and limit their expense by limiting their need to
    increase their capacity. It means nothing that your return in paid-for
    performance is diminished. Your article points out that Bell Canada, the
    "backbone provider" has this policy in place and the ISPs are upset at
    Ma-Bell for this practice, presumably because it upsets their throttling
    in place or planned.

    --
    Gus

  2. Re: Problem with Flash plug-in.

    Gus Richter wrote:
    > Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
    >> Gus Richter wrote:
    >>> The Real Bev wrote:
    >>>> Gus Richter wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> squaredancer wrote:
    >>>>>> hi Bev! you been on vacation, sick, hospital or someplace without
    >>>>>> electricity?? haven't seen you for a long time now!
    >>>>> Hmmmm?
    >>>>>
    >>>> I didn't look like that even when I might have been expected to! So
    >>>> which of you guys has signed up?
    >>> Actually, I'm not in the UK and don't have Virgin Media as my ISP.
    >>> On the other hand, I believe that most ISPs are either doing the same
    >>> or are looking at this.
    >>>

    >> no, now they're into throttling, for example:
    >> http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...8c&k=85066&p=1

    >
    > Exactly. "Throttling" is the term to use. You pay for something, but
    > they throttle you depending on time of day, what they believe your use
    > may be, and other reasons they come up with. All this in order to save
    > their bandwidth and limit their expense by limiting their need to
    > increase their capacity. It means nothing that your return in paid-for
    > performance is diminished. Your article points out that Bell Canada, the
    > "backbone provider" has this policy in place and the ISPs are upset at
    > Ma-Bell for this practice, presumably because it upsets their throttling
    > in place or planned.
    >


    its perfectly legel cause its in your control. It just like
    they can limit your internet speed because its in your
    control. For example, if you signed up for a speed of 5 meg
    download speed, and you're only getting 2 meg download
    speed, then thats perfectly legal.

    --
    *IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email
    help!!!! Emails to me may become public

    Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech
    Laws, which applies everywhere in the FREE world, except for
    some strange reason, not to the mozilla.org newsgroup
    servers, where your posting may get you banned.

    Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
    http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm

  3. Re: Problem with Flash plug-in.

    Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
    > Gus Richter wrote:
    >> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
    >>> Gus Richter wrote:
    >>>> The Real Bev wrote:
    >>>>> Gus Richter wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> squaredancer wrote:
    >>>>>>> hi Bev! you been on vacation, sick, hospital or someplace
    >>>>>>> without electricity?? haven't seen you for a long time now!
    >>>>>> Hmmmm?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> I didn't look like that even when I might have been expected to!
    >>>>> So which of you guys has signed up?
    >>>> Actually, I'm not in the UK and don't have Virgin Media as my ISP.
    >>>> On the other hand, I believe that most ISPs are either doing the
    >>>> same or are looking at this.
    >>>>
    >>> no, now they're into throttling, for example:
    >>> http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...8c&k=85066&p=1

    >>
    >>
    >> Exactly. "Throttling" is the term to use. You pay for something, but
    >> they throttle you depending on time of day, what they believe your use
    >> may be, and other reasons they come up with. All this in order to save
    >> their bandwidth and limit their expense by limiting their need to
    >> increase their capacity. It means nothing that your return in paid-for
    >> performance is diminished. Your article points out that Bell Canada,
    >> the "backbone provider" has this policy in place and the ISPs are
    >> upset at Ma-Bell for this practice, presumably because it upsets their
    >> throttling in place or planned.
    >>

    >
    > its perfectly legel cause its in your control. It just like they can
    > limit your internet speed because its in your control. For example, if
    > you signed up for a speed of 5 meg download speed, and you're only
    > getting 2 meg download speed, then thats perfectly legal.


    Explain how it's in my control as to my down/up-load speed.

    --
    Gus


  4. Re: Problem with Flash plug-in.

    Gus Richter wrote:
    > Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
    >> Gus Richter wrote:
    >>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
    >>>> Gus Richter wrote:
    >>>>> The Real Bev wrote:
    >>>>>> Gus Richter wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> squaredancer wrote:
    >>>>>>>> hi Bev! you been on vacation, sick, hospital or someplace
    >>>>>>>> without electricity?? haven't seen you for a long time now!
    >>>>>>> Hmmmm?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> I didn't look like that even when I might have been expected to!
    >>>>>> So which of you guys has signed up?
    >>>>> Actually, I'm not in the UK and don't have Virgin Media as my ISP.
    >>>>> On the other hand, I believe that most ISPs are either doing the
    >>>>> same or are looking at this.
    >>>>>
    >>>> no, now they're into throttling, for example:
    >>>> http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...8c&k=85066&p=1
    >>>
    >>> Exactly. "Throttling" is the term to use. You pay for something, but
    >>> they throttle you depending on time of day, what they believe your use
    >>> may be, and other reasons they come up with. All this in order to save
    >>> their bandwidth and limit their expense by limiting their need to
    >>> increase their capacity. It means nothing that your return in paid-for
    >>> performance is diminished. Your article points out that Bell Canada,
    >>> the "backbone provider" has this policy in place and the ISPs are
    >>> upset at Ma-Bell for this practice, presumably because it upsets their
    >>> throttling in place or planned.
    >>>

    >> its perfectly legel cause its in your control. It just like they can
    >> limit your internet speed because its in your control. For example, if
    >> you signed up for a speed of 5 meg download speed, and you're only
    >> getting 2 meg download speed, then thats perfectly legal.

    >
    > Explain how it's in my control as to my down/up-load speed.
    >


    sorry, its this Q crap problem.

    It should be "its perfectly legel cause its in your
    contract. It's just like they can limit your internet speed
    because it too is in your contract."

    I was thinking contract, but it came out control. I must be
    taking typing lessons from Lee ;-) :-D

    --
    *IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email
    help!!!! Emails to me may become public

    Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech
    Laws, which applies everywhere in the FREE world, except for
    some strange reason, not to the mozilla.org newsgroup
    servers, where your posting may get you banned.

    Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
    http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm

  5. Re: Problem with Flash plug-in.

    Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
    > Gus Richter wrote:
    >> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
    >>> Gus Richter wrote:
    >>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
    >>>>> Gus Richter wrote:
    >>>>>> The Real Bev wrote:
    >>>>>>> Gus Richter wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> squaredancer wrote:
    >>>>>>>>> hi Bev! you been on vacation, sick, hospital or someplace
    >>>>>>>>> without electricity?? haven't seen you for a long time now!
    >>>>>>>> Hmmmm?
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I didn't look like that even when I might have been expected to!
    >>>>>>> So which of you guys has signed up?
    >>>>>> Actually, I'm not in the UK and don't have Virgin Media as my ISP.
    >>>>>> On the other hand, I believe that most ISPs are either doing the
    >>>>>> same or are looking at this.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> no, now they're into throttling, for example:
    >>>>> http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...8c&k=85066&p=1
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Exactly. "Throttling" is the term to use. You pay for something, but
    >>>> they throttle you depending on time of day, what they believe your
    >>>> use may be, and other reasons they come up with. All this in order
    >>>> to save their bandwidth and limit their expense by limiting their
    >>>> need to increase their capacity. It means nothing that your return
    >>>> in paid-for performance is diminished. Your article points out that
    >>>> Bell Canada, the "backbone provider" has this policy in place and
    >>>> the ISPs are upset at Ma-Bell for this practice, presumably because
    >>>> it upsets their throttling in place or planned.
    >>>>
    >>> its perfectly legel cause its in your control. It just like they can
    >>> limit your internet speed because its in your control. For example,
    >>> if you signed up for a speed of 5 meg download speed, and you're only
    >>> getting 2 meg download speed, then thats perfectly legal.

    >>
    >> Explain how it's in my control as to my down/up-load speed.
    >>

    >
    > sorry, its this Q crap problem.
    >
    > It should be "its perfectly legel cause its in your contract. It's just
    > like they can limit your internet speed because it too is in your
    > contract."
    >
    > I was thinking contract, but it came out control. I must be taking
    > typing lessons from Lee ;-) :-D


    Legality aside, people are upset about the trend in question.
    Witness the website and the article.

    --
    Gus


  6. Re: Problem with Flash plug-in.

    On 30.04.2008 21:24, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused Gus Richter to
    generate the following:? :
    > Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
    >
    >> Gus Richter wrote:
    >>
    >>> The Real Bev wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Gus Richter wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> squaredancer wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> hi Bev! you been on vacation, sick, hospital or someplace without
    >>>>>> electricity?? haven't seen you for a long time now!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> Hmmmm?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>> I didn't look like that even when I might have been expected to! So
    >>>> which of you guys has signed up?
    >>>>
    >>> Actually, I'm not in the UK and don't have Virgin Media as my ISP.
    >>> On the other hand, I believe that most ISPs are either doing the same
    >>> or are looking at this.
    >>>
    >>>

    >> no, now they're into throttling, for example:
    >> http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...8c&k=85066&p=1
    >>

    >
    > Exactly. "Throttling" is the term to use. You pay for something, but
    > they throttle you depending on time of day, what they believe your use
    > may be, and other reasons they come up with. All this in order to save
    > their bandwidth and limit their expense by limiting their need to
    > increase their capacity. It means nothing that your return in paid-for
    > performance is diminished. Your article points out that Bell Canada, the
    > "backbone provider" has this policy in place and the ISPs are upset at
    > Ma-Bell for this practice, presumably because it upsets their throttling
    > in place or planned.
    >
    >


    you will see that most - if not *all* - providers will contract a speed
    "up to" ...... the contract says "up to 10" and they give you 3 - are
    they telling lies ??
    the fraud is, that that is also the way any court of law will see it!

    Now, of course - if you got 13 or 15, then you could for sure, sue them
    for breach of contract..... but would you???

    reg

  7. Re: Problem with Flash plug-in.

    squaredancer wrote:
    >
    > you will see that most - if not *all* - providers will contract a speed
    > "up to" ...... the contract says "up to 10" and they give you 3 - are
    > they telling lies ??
    > the fraud is, that that is also the way any court of law will see it!


    If there are unforeseen circumstances, etc., I can understand until they
    correct the situation. I am however, against any _intentional_
    interference with the quality of service provided. It's the principle of
    the thing. Period.

    Regarding legality, I have no doubt that they have consulted their
    attorneys on this, but consider that those escape clauses really mean
    little. "Reasonable expectations" is higher on the scale of things. That
    being said, it would all depend on the judge; how he felt that day, how
    in tune he is with the problem, how biased, etc. In other words, it can
    _always_ go one way or the other.

    --
    Gus

  8. Re: Problem with Flash plug-in.

    Gus Richter wrote:
    > squaredancer wrote:
    >> you will see that most - if not *all* - providers will contract a speed
    >> "up to" ...... the contract says "up to 10" and they give you 3 - are
    >> they telling lies ??
    >> the fraud is, that that is also the way any court of law will see it!

    >
    > If there are unforeseen circumstances, etc., I can understand until they
    > correct the situation. I am however, against any _intentional_
    > interference with the quality of service provided. It's the principle of
    > the thing. Period.
    >
    > Regarding legality, I have no doubt that they have consulted their
    > attorneys on this, but consider that those escape clauses really mean
    > little. "Reasonable expectations" is higher on the scale of things. That
    > being said, it would all depend on the judge; how he felt that day, how
    > in tune he is with the problem, how biased, etc. In other words, it can
    > _always_ go one way or the other.
    >


    if you signed up for speeds of 10 megs, and you're only
    getting 3, then read your contract. It might have a clause
    in it that says: "you can get a speed _of up to_ 10 megs,"
    or something to that effect. With that tiny little clause,
    they've got you, and they can limit you at anything they want.

    --
    *IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email
    help!!!! Emails to me may become public

    Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech
    Laws, which applies everywhere in the FREE world, except for
    some strange reason, not to the mozilla.org newsgroup
    servers, where your posting may get you banned.

    Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
    http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm

  9. Re: Problem with Flash plug-in.

    Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:

    > if you signed up for speeds of 10 megs, and you're only
    > getting 3, then read your contract. It might have a clause
    > in it that says: "you can get a speed _of up to_ 10 megs,"
    > or something to that effect. With that tiny little clause,
    > they've got you, and they can limit you at anything they want.


    Too bad for you if they're the only crap game in town. Fortunately,
    AT&T now offers DSL (all speeds, not just the piddling borderline speed
    they offered a year ago) to my neighborhood so all I have to do is tell
    my cable supplier every six months that their list price isn't good
    enough to keep me as a customer. Works pretty well :-)

    --
    Cheers, Bev (Happy Linux User #85683, Slackware 11.0)
    ================================================== =============
    When your only tool is a hammer, everything looks like a thumb.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3