I think you give China too much credit here. Those in authority have been trying to suppress ideas they object to since the beginning of time. And governments have been trying to censor the internet since they became aware that it existed.
The Thai authorities are not the first to struggle with the concept that censoring the internet is difficult/pointless and wont be the last.
Here we have the antithesis to the view that traditional media equates to quality reporting.
The NY times confidently reports that a process that has been under way since the birth of the commercial internet is some new trend. And of course national security is at risk!
Sovereignty issues over who controls the internet were a factor in the development of peering between networks within the European Region and separately within the Asian Region last decade. But so was cost.
Historically the massive trans-atlatic and trans US capacity over supply made it cheaper for Asia and European networks to exchange traffic via the USA, but now that demand is beginning to catch up with supply it again starts to make economic sense to look at direct European- Asian connections. In building these cables it starts to make sense to land more of them in the middle east.
This isnt about fear of interception, its economics.
China, Japan, less reliant on the US? Actually pick any country with English as a second language and I think you will find demand for local content in the local language is primarily driven by consumer demand.
I could go on, but my lunch hour's over.
When a US reporter interviews a bunch of US "experts" (taking Vint Cerf's comments out of context) and then concludes that foreign networks are making investment decisions based upon US conditions rather than their own economics... I'm sorry, it's not news, it's Fark.
Oh, and I suppose I should say something about what Mike wrote. I agree that politicians out side of the US do view investment in infrastructure as important to their economic development. I just don't think that this has much to do with what is or isn't happening in the US.
I'm not going to assume that their motives are necessarily greed.
I suspect the root cause of this idea is that they are afraid that the cure, once found will be patented and priced beyond the means of most Indonesians.
If I'm right, then they're fighting fire with fire, which can work, but carries an element of risk. It would be bitter irony if in posturing to ensure equitable access to vaccines developed from the samples they delay it's development to the point that it that pandemic occurred before the vaccine was ready.
The idea of owning a virus isnt all that crazy when compared to some of the things that you can patent.
You can't win in the innovation stakes by yourself? Buy yourself a second change lucky draw ticket through the patents office!
You think your idea is so obvious you're embarrassed to call it an innovation? Buy a ticket in the patents office lottery any, the odds are good and you've got to be in it to win it!
Find yourself innovatively challenged? Our lottery tickets are fully transferable on the secondary market and going for a song. You too can win in the patent office lottery!
I agree with the sentiment of the post, but I disagree with the opening position that price and value are different. I think that you are confusing price with cost.
Money has been used as the primary proxy for value for a long time. Instead of saying "I think three of your pigs is worth one of my cows", you can say "one pig is $100 and one cow is $300". Of course the swineherd can always disagree and say "cow shit! My pigs are worth $150!" and agree not to trade/sell.
To get to my point, the value you place on something is exactly equal to the price you are willing to pay (or sell at). The things being overlooked are:
the buyer and seller do not have to agree on a value/price; and
the price or value need not be measured only in monetary terms.
Now with the internet to distribute certain types of goods, the incremental cost of producing additional items approaches zero. Intelligent people understand this and are understandably reluctant to pay money. Zero cost of production does affect how people value things.
Those that are producing these type of goods need to get a handle on it, and quick! They need to unlearn the idea that a direct exchange of money is the only way of exchanging value. When the buyers fundamentally disagree with the sellers on the value, its generally the seller that will loose in the long run.
I've seen the pictures and it is a farce. I wonder if this is not a case of some official unable to admit a cock-up because he doesnt want to lose face.
Try this scenario:
1. original instruction cover brands that could be seen with the rings clearly implying a sponsorship relationship.
2. Some over zealous flunky ran riot with the tape.
3. Some Journo asks a higher level flunky "what the huh?"
4. Higher level flunky defends the lower level flunky's actions without checking the facts.
I don't disagree that attempting to deputise ISPs and content providers as proxy law enforcement bodies is fundamentally floored. One of the best things about leaving my old company was that I wouldn't have to deal with that sh*t again.
But my point is that M$, Y! and GOOG have been here before and will be here again. This is just part of the cost of doing business in India and if it was too burdensome they wouldnt be there.
If you want to do business in India then you have to do it under Indian law. Not all that different from any other country in that respect.
The feasibility of expecting a company to police their customers is something left up to the courts and feasibility doesn't change any expectation that they will.
While it may be part of the enforcement culture to go after the big foreign guys first or at least make more noise when they do; they do also go after the people who are actually breaking the law, not only the big guys that may arguably have facilitated it.
And in a case like this at least going after Y!, M$ and GOOG gets some publicity that it is illegal to abort a foetus just because it happens to be female.
Did you consider the possibility that Cogent may have simply lost market share? Their major customers are going to be multi-homed and can easily shift traffic to other networks to arbitrage pricing or whatever.
Cogent doesn't have cancer, therefore no one has cancer? Sorry Mike, but if your going to rant about this stuff you need to start picking better examples.
Planed obsolecense is still there in the background. It's just that by leaving out features (@CC planned incompleteness, I like it!) they can engineer a shorter replacement cycle. - there's a limit to how unreliable you can make something before people stop buying from you.
But all sorts of people are happy to replace a year old phone because the new model supports "3G", even if you still cant change the battery, the case is prone to developing cracks and the 3G chipset under delivers.
"looking at the core and finding that it's under-utilized just ads credence to [the] position [...] that any congestion that exists is because the Telecos wont improve their infrastructure"
Mike,
I'm going to have to spend more than 15 minutes looking at Odlyzko's site.
However, the source data appears to be mostly internet exchanges and universities. The few network operators that I checked appear to be reporting on core traffic. He cites reports from a few other areas that I need to look at to come to a conclusion.
My first impressions are that he is looking at the wrong part of the network, about as far away from a broadband user as you can get.
I dont know what broadband traffic patterns look like out at the edge of the network but a quick look at the source leaves me wondering if Odlyzko does either.
"why is it that the recording industry (and the politicians it preaches to) insist that file sharing is destroying the recording industry"?
Because file sharing is destroying the recording industry's old business model and for them, the industry and it's business model are the same.
While Robbie Jr did rather sloppily use the terms "p2p" and "p2p file sharing" in the letter, I think the key point was that their policy prohibits excessive use of bandwidth that would degrade other customers service.
Yeah certainly the fuss this created is about marketing.
The idea that "The customer is always right" is pure marketing. It comes from the concept that one way to make money is to give your customers whatever they ask for.
A different marketing idea is that a company should focus on a particular market segment (eg coffee Snob/Connoisseur).
A lot of people like that first concept because it puts them at the centre of the universe. But those objecting most rabidly are forgetting (or probably never knew in the first place) that marketing is about maximising earnings and profits. Sure it does this through trying to understand customers/markets, but its about the money.
If these guys have got their marketing wrong they will go bankrupt. No need to get offended or moralistic.
I was interested to find out why referencing more and older articles was considered a good thing. But its behind a pay wall and I am not $10 interested.
Its rather ironic. I wonder if the article ventures to suggest that one the way to address this perceived problem is to put maybe more content, freely available on the internet? I guess I'll never know.
@Bubba "Crimes against humanity" is a bit rough. Journals and trade magazines, just like all of the media need a little time to adapt. Give them awhile they'll come around.
Because the system is so messed up that they might just get it. With the patent they might use it to
a) sue some sucker who might cave and pay them money or
b) when some troll tries to sue them for some patent infringement, pull it out and counter sue.
On the post: Thailand Continues To Try To Mimic China With Internet Censorship
Mimic China?
On the post: Internet Traffic Routing Around The US
Re: Re: Is this Fark?
True, this wouldn't make it to their front page, but it sure looks like an article hastily thrown together to fill in a few columns.
On the post: Internet Traffic Routing Around The US
Is this Fark?
The NY times confidently reports that a process that has been under way since the birth of the commercial internet is some new trend. And of course national security is at risk!
Sovereignty issues over who controls the internet were a factor in the development of peering between networks within the European Region and separately within the Asian Region last decade. But so was cost.
Historically the massive trans-atlatic and trans US capacity over supply made it cheaper for Asia and European networks to exchange traffic via the USA, but now that demand is beginning to catch up with supply it again starts to make economic sense to look at direct European- Asian connections. In building these cables it starts to make sense to land more of them in the middle east.
This isnt about fear of interception, its economics.
China, Japan, less reliant on the US? Actually pick any country with English as a second language and I think you will find demand for local content in the local language is primarily driven by consumer demand.
I could go on, but my lunch hour's over.
When a US reporter interviews a bunch of US "experts" (taking Vint Cerf's comments out of context) and then concludes that foreign networks are making investment decisions based upon US conditions rather than their own economics... I'm sorry, it's not news, it's Fark.
Oh, and I suppose I should say something about what Mike wrote. I agree that politicians out side of the US do view investment in infrastructure as important to their economic development. I just don't think that this has much to do with what is or isn't happening in the US.
On the post: Pharma Patents And Why Indonesia Is Hoarding Bird Flu Samples
Fire with fire
I suspect the root cause of this idea is that they are afraid that the cure, once found will be patented and priced beyond the means of most Indonesians.
If I'm right, then they're fighting fire with fire, which can work, but carries an element of risk. It would be bitter irony if in posturing to ensure equitable access to vaccines developed from the samples they delay it's development to the point that it that pandemic occurred before the vaccine was ready.
The idea of owning a virus isnt all that crazy when compared to some of the things that you can patent.
On the post: Immersion Settles Up With Microsoft: Hands Over $20.75 Million Of Money It Got From Sony
three ways to play and win!!!
You think your idea is so obvious you're embarrassed to call it an innovation? Buy a ticket in the patents office lottery any, the odds are good and you've got to be in it to win it!
Find yourself innovatively challenged? Our lottery tickets are fully transferable on the secondary market and going for a song. You too can win in the patent office lottery!
Three ways to play, innovation optional.
On the post: Understanding The Difference Between Price And Value; Product And Benefit
Zero Price or Zero Cost?
Money has been used as the primary proxy for value for a long time. Instead of saying "I think three of your pigs is worth one of my cows", you can say "one pig is $100 and one cow is $300". Of course the swineherd can always disagree and say "cow shit! My pigs are worth $150!" and agree not to trade/sell.
To get to my point, the value you place on something is exactly equal to the price you are willing to pay (or sell at). The things being overlooked are:
Now with the internet to distribute certain types of goods, the incremental cost of producing additional items approaches zero. Intelligent people understand this and are understandably reluctant to pay money. Zero cost of production does affect how people value things.
Those that are producing these type of goods need to get a handle on it, and quick! They need to unlearn the idea that a direct exchange of money is the only way of exchanging value. When the buyers fundamentally disagree with the sellers on the value, its generally the seller that will loose in the long run.
On the post: Covering Up Any Brand In Beijing That Hasn't Paid To Sponsor The Olympics
Face and the farce?
Try this scenario:
1. original instruction cover brands that could be seen with the rings clearly implying a sponsorship relationship.
2. Some over zealous flunky ran riot with the tape.
3. Some Journo asks a higher level flunky "what the huh?"
4. Higher level flunky defends the lower level flunky's actions without checking the facts.
5. Hilarity ensues.
On the post: Google, Microsoft And Yahoo Sued In India For Not Preventing Sex Selection Ads
Re: Re: Part of doing business in India
I don't disagree that attempting to deputise ISPs and content providers as proxy law enforcement bodies is fundamentally floored. One of the best things about leaving my old company was that I wouldn't have to deal with that sh*t again.
But my point is that M$, Y! and GOOG have been here before and will be here again. This is just part of the cost of doing business in India and if it was too burdensome they wouldnt be there.
On the post: Google, Microsoft And Yahoo Sued In India For Not Preventing Sex Selection Ads
Part of doing business in India
The feasibility of expecting a company to police their customers is something left up to the courts and feasibility doesn't change any expectation that they will.
While it may be part of the enforcement culture to go after the big foreign guys first or at least make more noise when they do; they do also go after the people who are actually breaking the law, not only the big guys that may arguably have facilitated it.
And in a case like this at least going after Y!, M$ and GOOG gets some publicity that it is illegal to abort a foetus just because it happens to be female.
On the post: ISP Admits Internet Traffic Is Actually Declining
whatever
Cogent doesn't have cancer, therefore no one has cancer? Sorry Mike, but if your going to rant about this stuff you need to start picking better examples.
On the post: Is Planned Obsolescence A Thing Of The Past?
no, it's still there
But all sorts of people are happy to replace a year old phone because the new model supports "3G", even if you still cant change the battery, the case is prone to developing cracks and the 3G chipset under delivers.
On the post: In An Age Of Abundance, Attribution Is More Important Than Copying
Whether you choose to do so or not, someone taking your work and passing it off as their own is going to hurt.
Plagiarism and copyright are two different issues.
On the post: Broadband Crunch Still Nowhere To Be Found; Internet Growth May Actually Be Slowing
Re: Re: I just checked out the source data
"looking at the core and finding that it's under-utilized just ads credence to [the] position [...] that any congestion that exists is because the Telecos wont improve their infrastructure"
Are you agreeing with me or disagreeing with me?
On the post: Broadband Crunch Still Nowhere To Be Found; Internet Growth May Actually Be Slowing
I just checked out the source data
I'm going to have to spend more than 15 minutes looking at Odlyzko's site.
However, the source data appears to be mostly internet exchanges and universities. The few network operators that I checked appear to be reporting on core traffic. He cites reports from a few other areas that I need to look at to come to a conclusion.
My first impressions are that he is looking at the wrong part of the network, about as far away from a broadband user as you can get.
I dont know what broadband traffic patterns look like out at the edge of the network but a quick look at the source leaves me wondering if Odlyzko does either.
On the post: Yet Another Star Singer Doesn't Mind File Sharing
On the post: Comparing The Telecom Industry To OPEC Isn't So Crazy
You're both right
It's not crazy to compare apples and oranges and conclude that they're both fruits; but to conclude that an apple is the same as an orange...
At some level they are similar but on other levels they are so completely different the comparison is meaningless.
On the post: AT&T Says It Will Cut Off P2P Wireless Users; But What About Pandora Users?
P2P or excessive use?
On the post: Sometimes The Customer Is Wrong
Re: Marketing.
The idea that "The customer is always right" is pure marketing. It comes from the concept that one way to make money is to give your customers whatever they ask for.
A different marketing idea is that a company should focus on a particular market segment (eg coffee Snob/Connoisseur).
A lot of people like that first concept because it puts them at the centre of the universe. But those objecting most rabidly are forgetting (or probably never knew in the first place) that marketing is about maximising earnings and profits. Sure it does this through trying to understand customers/markets, but its about the money.
If these guys have got their marketing wrong they will go bankrupt. No need to get offended or moralistic.
On the post: No, The Internet Is Not Bad For Science; Bad Research Is Bad For Science
Ironicly...
Its rather ironic. I wonder if the article ventures to suggest that one the way to address this perceived problem is to put maybe more content, freely available on the internet? I guess I'll never know.
@Bubba "Crimes against humanity" is a bit rough. Journals and trade magazines, just like all of the media need a little time to adapt. Give them awhile they'll come around.
On the post: Creating A List From A Database? Prepare For A Patent Infringement Suit
Re: Simply ridiculous
Because the system is so messed up that they might just get it. With the patent they might use it to
a) sue some sucker who might cave and pay them money or
b) when some troll tries to sue them for some patent infringement, pull it out and counter sue.
Thats the way the game is played.
Next >>