The Lie of Net Neutrality

In simplest terms, Net Neutrality (hereafter “NN”) is intended to prevent your ISP from treating any data differently – that is, they have to let you use the Internet the way *you* want to, not the way *they* want you to. Like all other interventionism, it’s a lofty goal and one that should have no serious negative consequences, right? Sure. But, like every other form of interventionism, the proof is in the pudding. No law or regulation should be judged on its intentions, but rather only its results.

First a Little History

NN was intended to stop a small handful of individual issues that occurred over approximately 20 years of the Internet – issues that had either already been dealt with by *other* laws, or by the ISP’s customers themselves.

In fact, since NN was passed in 2015 (a FOUR HUNDRED PAGE regulation, that only limits certain actions by certain ISPs) the very things that NN was supposed to prevent and had never been performed before were *actually* done by the companies that did not fall within the FCC Title II power grab (in other words, they weren’t ISPs so they didn’t have to obey the new FCC rules — and they were probably inspired to do it because the FCC told ISPs that they weren’t allowed!).

Oh, on that note…so the way the FCC created NN in the first place was by declaring a law passed in the 1930s to prevent abuse by telephone and radio operators somehow granted them the authority to (without approval of congress, mind you) determine what any ISP could and could not do with their own services. Other laws actually forbade the FCC from doing this, and congress had even taken this up for vote and voted against it, but the FCC did it anyway. Nothing like a runaway government agency that isn’t subject to checks and balances, eh?

Here’s a short list of some of the things that NN declares illegal:

  • the ability for your ISP or cell carrier to *not* charge you for data used (this is called Zero-rating) for services they work with (like Comcast not charging to stream movies from their own library). Even though this is just stupidly obvious for many reasons, it’s actually one of the primary reasons why NN is supported by the major front groups for NN.
  • the ability for ISPs to enter into arrangements to improve performance between their customers.
  • the ability for ISPs to create plans catering to unique market segments – like people that don’t want to watch TV over the internet, so they might be interested in a much smaller (and cheaper) plan – that’s illegal under NN.
  • the ability for ISPs to block content that their own customers request be blocked (such as online gambling, porn, lingerie sites and so on), because that prevents “potential” users at a customer’s location from being able to see an “unfiltered” internet. This means that McDonald’s and Starbucks can actually be fined by the FCC for preventing people from watching porn in their lobby on their free wifi.
  • the ability for your ISP to provide free service to you in exchange for showing you advertisements or other revenue-generating options like your participation in their forums or being a customer already. Nevermind that this is how broadcast television *still* works (which also falls within the purview of the same FCC!), and that Comcast, AT&T and many other ISPs already have an insanely huge network of free wifi available to their existing customers (in violation of this NN clause).

This particular ad was actually created by a “prominent advocate of net neutrality” — that apparently can’t “math”

The way NN has been implemented is similar to having some people complain that Showtime and HBO aren’t available on their TV plan, so instead of simply ordering it and allowing those interested people the shows that they want included, the federal government declared that *nobody* could have TV services unless they also paid for Showtime and HBO.

Every single bill has gone up, and not a single person is better off for it…well, except for the ISPs that make a lot more money as a result. And, they get to buy out the smaller ISPs that can’t afford to *not* make traffic shaping arrangements with their backbone providers which are now illegal under NN.

I happen to run a hosting company. 3 years ago, before NN, I had near unlimited data included with my servers. Data was *cheap*. 2 years ago, after NN, the price has shot up over 30,000% — I get much less data on my servers now and don’t have that huge safety cushion, since paying for the same data cap would cost me an extra $8,000/month to get the same caps I had only 3 years ago.

Guess what this means? Web hosts have to increase their hosting fees, and their customers (anyone with a website!) has to find a way to make it worthwhile. Most of them will increase the number of ads that appear on their sites. Have you noticed that EVERY SINGLE SITE is now so ad-heavy that it feels more like you’re wading thru late night television than browsing the web? Yeah, you can blame NN for this. (But don’t deal with it – install AdBlock – it’ll also prevent a lot of malware since most malware is distributed through ads.)

Title II Vote

The thing is, the vote this week isn’t even on NN! It’s actually on Title II, the specific section of the Communications Act of 1934 that defines “common carriers” (aka, telephone services), and whether ISPs really fall within the FCC’s purview. The MSM, NN advocates, and other idiots, are deceiving the entire world by misrepresenting every single aspect of it and forcing the federal government to get involved, to prevent theoretical problems that just don’t exist or are addressed by other existing law.

You gotta ask yourself: is it more likely that with federal involvement the Internet will remain true and pure, or, is it more likely that this “mere” 400 page regulation is just the first volley of an incipient federal government program that’s intended to eventually allow them to be involved in every single IP transaction?

I can totally imagine the FCC declaring that, “in order to ensure that all traffic is treated equally, we need to have every byte that touches the Internet first pass through an NSA proxy in Utah…you know, for your own good!”

If anything, having the federal government dictate how and what you can do on the Internet is far closer to China’s ISP filters that are used to prevent access to ideas which the Chinese government feels threatened of, than it is to actual freedom. Yes, the 400 pages of regulations do actually mention that unelected bureaucrats within the federal government get to decide whether content is allowed to be blocked or not. It reads an awful lot like the federal government wants to be the arbiter of what is seen on the Internet, even if they did write it with a very polite tone.

Think of NN as making a law against killing someone with a ham sandwich. Okay, *maybe* someone has actually thought of doing that before. But it doesn’t matter, since *murder* is already illegal. The end result of a law like that is that every meat market has to finance or obtain insurance to cover ham sales on the off chance that they’ll have to defend themselves against fines for ham sandwich murders. They also have to carefully interview their customers just in case granny is planning on killing grampa with that “ham off the bone.” Liability = risk + cost + time, which means that the price of ham will necessarily skyrocket. All to prevent something that’s already illegal!

How will repeal affect us?

Costs for data will reduce in price again, which means that ISPs can lower their rates. Will they? Probably not. The smaller ones will, but the larger ISPs will just use this as a long-term fast-cash infusion.

Some of the larger ones might actually create plans for “light” users that significantly reduces their costs. A niche of new ISPs may actually crop up *just* for providing email+social media access at a super-cheap rate. Netflix or other video streaming services will probably open their own ISPs so they can own the “last mile” and significantly reduce their costs.

Is the 400 page regulation really effective at preventing those theoretical problems? No. Especially not, since some companies started doing the very things they said not to the minute the FCC created the regs! Removing the regulations will not prevent companies from being evil, but with the previous 20+ years as a guide, the fanciful issues that they’re concerned with are not going to happen anyway, or, if they do, there are existing laws to address them.

Will the Internet be set on fire or have its “tubes” tied if NN is reversed? Hell, no. NN is a stain on the internet, and is actually causing far more problems than it could ever hope to prevent. One thing is certain: the Internet is beholden to no one. Like a cockroach, it’ll survive long after we’re gone, whether NN remains or not.

The Nth Degree

Stupidity knows no bounds, but in my experience is especially prevalent in people who always feel the need to prove their intelligence. If the first thing someone does to defend their position  is to point at their license or degree, chances are  very good they’re completely inept.  Recently I had a discussion with someone who reminded me just how offensive it is to even try to communicate with these idiots.

Techno GripeMy very first experience with someone who had a master’s degree in computer science was my first duty station supervisor in the military. This LT (JG)  was in charge of the base computer systems, and I was his first and only enlisted staff member. I had never touched a conventional computer before, knew absolutely nothing about them, and was, of course, immediately tasked with building hundreds of computers from parts and then shortly thereafter tasked with being the security point of contact for all the military users of  tens of thousands of computers across every military base on the entire West coast of the US.

The  problem is that the LT  was a degreed idiot. He may have passed a few tests and had a pretty piece of paper with his  name on it,  but he had no clue how technology actually worked, he didn’t understand the very basic concept of Boolean values and could not even comprehend what a batch file was.

Seeing that I’d get no help or answers from him, I took the  manuals home and  read them cover to  cover, read the entire IETF RFC library and many technical books on the subject  over the course of my first few weeks at that assignment. Then  I spent eight months trying to gracefully educate him on these basics…and in his gratitude he took every opportunity to treat me like crap for having a better understanding of technology than he did after years and years of his “education.”

Fast forward a few years. When my son was a toddler we spent a lot of time with his friends’ parents. One lady in particular (Maria, a college professor) drove me quite batty. Most of her family were MD’s and many in my family were DC’s, so,  knowing only this,  she treated me like a pariah. Maria would take her son to urgent care if he slept in late, had a headache or dared to talk back to her. In her mind, these were all major defects and something just had to be wrong with him.  As you can expect, this poor child was one of those kids who was branded ADHD before he could talk.

Maria stepped on my every nerve, but one specific incident stands out. She was in the middle of telling me how chiropractors frequently paralyze their patients (a flat-out lie), and I pointed out that MD’s are far more lethal than guns. In point of fact, your MD is  about 300x more likely to kill you than a gun. Not wanting to make it personal by suggesting that Maria’s family were incompetent or homicidal psychopaths, I followed that up with this simple  statement: “but you have to remember that 50% of all doctors graduate in the bottom half of their class.”

She stood there glaring at me, aghast, her jaw dropped to the floor, for what felt like a full minute. The other parents and even the children in the room were completely silent while  we  waited, watching intently  for  her response.  The only sound was the air conditioner chugging away.

Finally, she screamed, “no they don’t!” The other parents and some of the children couldn’t even contain their laughter. This woman was so high-and-mighty, perpetually attacking everything and everyone she disagreed with,  but couldn’t do fifth-grade math?  Apparently, the reason 7,500 people die each year from pharmaceutical errors is that simple mathematics are beyond the scope of medical school.

But this all pales in comparison to what happened with my latest experience with another degreed idiot. A client’s site had both an email account and an ftp account hijacked within 24 hours. The passwords  had both been randomly generated, were not brute-forced,  and only this one person, Jane,  had access to both of them.  I asked the client to talk to her and have her scan her computer for malware so we could ensure the machine wouldn’t be compromised again after a password reset. The client forwarded me a message from Jane where Jane clearly stated that she had not been infected and that it couldn’t have been related to her.

I took the time to be sure and again reviewed the logs. The only tie for these two accounts was definitely Jane, but, she was quite adamant that she had not been infected. I wrote a very civil and respectful message to her asking her to scan again, along with my regular advice for security, and the common compromise mechanisms for the specific hijack I suspected. I even offered to login and verify that the machine was actually clean and safe.

Jane wrote back absolutely livid that I would dare suggest security changes or that she might have ever been infected. After all, and I quote, “My husband and I both have Master’s degrees in computer science…” The most compelling proof of this was that she didn’t use a single carriage return in her 350+ word message. Apparently she obtained her degree before keyboards included a return or enter key.

She also went into greater detail about how she had actually been infected, and it was none of my business, but even though neither of the antivirus programs on her computer could remove it, she was just sure it was gone now. Not interested in keeping it civil, she took several swipes at my character, my skill level and my education – including a statement about how my message to her was a perfect example of why IT workers  were justifiably hated.

I wrote her again, maintaining my civil and respectful tone (my professional policy is to “kill ’em with kindness”). I reassured her that it was not a personal  attack, and that she was the only one with access to both accounts.

As expected, her response was absurd, and only proved her level of incompetence. Remember: master’s degree in computer science, okay? She explained how there was never an “infection,” though there actually were files detected by both her antivirus programs whenever she opened her browser that  both antivirus programs  were each  incapable of removing…but just because there were infected files detected by both her antivirus programs doesn’t mean she was ever actually “infected.” And because I clearly needed the reminder, “you don’t know who you’re dealing with or what you’re talking about.” Topping it off, her firewall is “locked down tight.” As if firewalls had anything to do with normal browsing behavior. I’ll bet she regularly deletes her browser cookies for her “security,” too. Sigh.

Out of curiosity, and because I “didn’t know who I was dealing with”, I googled her name and location to see just how bad the state of the world was. Not surprisingly, this woman teaches computer science at a university. As hard as I tried, I couldn’t even feign surprise. Abrasive, defensive, ignorant and technologically incompetent. Yep, that sounds about right. She simply must be teaching computer science at a university somewhere. What’s more: her husband manages the campus IT network. It finally makes sense that about 30% of all hacking attempts against our servers are from college and university IP addresses.

The most appalling thing to me is that these people each felt so justified in their behavior that they were prepared to scream it from the rooftops. Not knowing that 50% and half mean the same thing, or that an infection is an infection (but especially when your antivirus is incapable of removing it), is a sign of extremely defective reasoning. These are the “experts” for military, medicine  and education, at least in their own heads.  They are so set in their opinions that facts, reason and logic are simply vulgar words to them. These people shape the minds of technology today.

And people still wonder why Windows 8 didn’t have a start button.

What I’ve really learned from these experiences is that my policy of being nice “no matter what” is the real source of this problem. Would the LT have still treated me so poorly had I not tried to help him understand the problems with his decisions? Would Maria have still had her abrasive behavior had I not taken the effort to allow her an out? Would Jane have attacked my character had I not offered to help her? We’ll never know.

Big Brother is Watching YOU!

Privacy has become a luxury that few people have the resources to afford. It seems our privacy is to be invaded at every turn. We know from past experience that anything useful and advantageous also has the potential for abuse and harm.

Look out everyone…big brother has arrived in style.

Security Tracking Systems For Today That Keep Up With The World Of Tomorrow

Metuchen, NJ, November 18, 2011

Image representing iPhone as depicted in Crunc...
Cell Phone Detectors

Security in this country is a huge issue; on a national level, and for corporations, prisons and individuals alike. This is where Berkeley Varitronics Systems comes in – a leading provider of advanced wireless solutions and security products to the domestic and international wireless telecommunications industry. CEO Scott Schober is a sought-after security expert who made a presentation at the inaugural Concordia Summit in New York City recently to top level political decision-makers from around the world that included Mikheil Saakashvili – President of Georgia, former Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski, former President George W. Bush, and Thomas Kean, former Governor of New Jersey.

Schober’s security team was part of the 9/11 first-responders who attempted to locate people buried under the rubble by locating their cell phones. BVS products can be used to detect anything – from people illegally crossing our borders, bomb threats, detecting smuggled cell phones in prisons, to protecting board room secrets of corporate America.

Berkeley Varitronics Wolfhound-Pro cell phone detector has been featured on Fox News. It is a precision, handheld, wireless sniffer specifically tuned to the RF signature of common cell phones for both U.S. and European bands and its high speed scanning receiver allows security personnel to locate nearby cell phones in either standby mode or during active voice, text or data transmissions. Instead of illegal and unsafe cellular jamming signals, this detector prevents wireless usage by detecting and even locating the perpetrator.

This product is vital in prisons where keeping cell phones out is becoming a major problem across the country, but especially in California where state prisoners are being bumped into local jails. Prisoners having access to cell phones is always a serious safety concern, but more so with gang members who use them to contact outside members, intimidate witnesses, or conduct criminal activity from inside prison walls. Cell phones can also be used to relay information on transportation of inmates, by giving date, time and route.

Berkeley Varitronics Systems are featured at all major security events. They were recently a featured company at the 4G World Conference in Chicago, where attendees were offered an opportunity to meet their guest spokesperson, Los Angeles Lakers star Andrew Goudelock. (Please see: Keeping America Safe) They also recently made a presentation at the Chiefs of Police Conference in Kansas where they demonstrated the latest in cell phone detection devices.

Located in Metuchen, NJ, Berkeley Varitronics Systems has been providing advanced wireless solutions and products to the domestic and international wireless telecommunications industry for over 38 years. For more information on this respected company, please visit: Berkeley Varitronics Systems, Inc.

Security Items of Interest

Enhanced by Zemanta