111–120 of 498 posts
Yes, it speaks volumes about comcast but i also speaks about the culture where comcast exist. And even IF there is backlash from this the whole idea that they might have gotten away with it is just absurd.
J. Livingood (a Comcast VP) responded to the OP: > [JL] We are not trying to sell you a new one. If you own your modem we're informing you that it is either end of life (EOL) or that you are about to get a speed upgrade that the modem will be unable to deliver. Incidentally, Livingood is a co-author of IETF RFC 6108, which he has conveniently linked. From the RFC's general requirements numero uno: > R3.1.1. Must Only…
We start telling customers that a modem needs to be upgraded when one of two things happen: either they are about to or just had a speed upgrade that their modem cannot support or the modem has gone end-of-life (EOL) from the vendor.
In the former case, if the device is leased, you are send a new one to replace the device and just have to basically say ok. In the latter case, it is a customer-owned device so the customer is asked to go buy a new one someplace (e.g. Amazon, BestBuy).
And in the EOL case, the vendor may have gone out of business or shut their cable modem business down, or otherwise decided to no longer support the device due to its age. That of course means that if a security issue came up, as they do, that the vendor would not be able or willing to provide a software fix for the device. So it's best to get the ball rolling to get those devices replaced when that occurs. Most of our EOL devices today are DOCSIS 2.0 devices (10+ years old), which can only do a single upstream and downstream channel (no channel bonding) and 1st generation DOCSIS 3.0 devices (5 - 8 years old).
And in US people seem to be happy about that. If they wouldn't, it would be changed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Good" as in morally upright? (in which case true). or "Good" as in technically competent? (in which case untrue).
These are not separate concerns. Morality is a necessary part of competence.
In any case, here the intended meaning was clearly "technical ability", which doesn't require morality
Whoever didnt se this coming was blind, at some point ppl will realise that jumping onto other nets popping up will be worth it. IM still waiting for the first real netbrowser (excluding the formerly US military funded Tor - which simply lets u access censored and hidden content) that gives you access to a handful of the largest net alternatives only.
How no one has commented on how this is illegal is something clearly lacking from the discussion. You create a transaction with one other part when you visit a site, you even bloody normatively shake hands... IF this stands it either means the marketplace has fallen or simply that USA is so fatally corrupt that it cant uphold the sole basis on which it functions by regressive (read: republican) ”theory”.
The thing that's so irritating about large telco's is not just that they're evil, but the casual stupidity of their actions, including their evil actions. I mean, look at the code. Look at the function of this code. Look at the business purpose of this code. Look at the security aspects of using this code. Look at the legal ramifications (why the hell is that LGPL thing up top there ?). Look at their internal communi…
it is my experiance the more smart people you add to a team the lower the collective IQ becomes Once you get up to around 20+ people on the team, the collective IQ of that teams drops to level where stupid things like this happen... Nothing good from development by committee, this appears to be a project that was developed by committee
Rather than arguing, I guess, many (who haven't left for one reason or another) would just go with "uh, whatever" attitude and slap something together just enough for PHB to see that popup (and let customer complaints do the rest).
When reading about Comcast I was always wondering why they have no competition when everyone who comments is complaining. I live in France and use Orange as my fibre provider. 1 Gbps/250 Mbps without constraints. I used to have Free which was great but did not offer fibre when fiber was installed. I switched to Orange in 5 min via a web page. I have another possibility (SFR) but they are despicable liars and for this…
A lot of cities grant exclusive agreements to these companies. Lately they are more competitive but historically one cable company would be granted the right to serve an entire city. For an example, here's the page for Portland's agreements: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/revenue/58882
A former coworker was telling me the difficulty of getting a DSLAM installed in a high-rental area, like a Seattle neighborhood. The DSLAM install requires approval from 40% of the property owners, so you might write each landlord a letter, but the landlords aren't opening letters unless there is rent money inside. So installing a DSLAM becomes a political game of convincing the several hundred "rental-transient"[0] people in the neighborhood to talk to their landlord. One of the reasons behind the "Ask your Landlord about Wave Internet" signs you see around.
[0] Renters often only plan to stay in a location through their current lease, and thus have less long-term concern over the area. In this way, transience destroys community.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good engineers don't do evil things, even if their bosses tell them to.
A mortgage and tuition for kids is a powerful motivator.