MetaFilter posts tagged with DSL and internet

FBI adds to wiretap wish list

fluffycreature — Mon, 15 Mar 2004 06:59:08 -0800

Proposal to have companies rewire their networks to support easy wiretapping by police "A far-reaching proposal from the FBI, made public Friday, would require all broadband Internet providers, including cable modem and DSL companies, to rewire their networks to support easy wiretapping by police. The FBI's request to the Federal Communications Commission aims to give police ready access to any form of Internet-based communications. If approved as drafted, the proposal could dramatically expand the scope of the agency's wiretap powers, raise costs for cable broadband companies and complicate Internet product development." Read more about the FBI's proposal at Cnet.com. or MSNBC. But where is the actual proposal?

dglynn — Wed, 14 Aug 2002 12:39:56 -0800

Buy SBC now. "In order to make sure the economy grows, we must bring the promise of broadband technology to millions of Americans,'' Bush said at a White House-sponsored economic forum. "Government at all levels should remove hurdles that slow the pace of deployment.''

Is the USTA happy about this type of talk? You bet. They would like to see passage of S.2430, also known as the Broadband Regulatory Parity Act of 2002. Others wouldn't. Some have studies (300K PDF) that argue local phone companies are slowing the growth of DSL for anti-competitive reasons.

Also, notice how the President said "bring the promise of broadband technology to millions of Americans", not all Americans? Might have something to do with the fact that rural DSL is really, really expensive to provide.

WolfDaddy — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 16:27:56 -0800

The California Public Utilities Commission says it can regulate DSL In what is being hailed as a victory by the California ISP Association, the CPUC has ruled that it will regulate DSL providers similar in manner to the state's power and telephone utilities. While this move could certainly curtail the big boys like PacBell from running roughshod over their smaller competitors, it seems like small, locally-owned ISP's may not have the resources to withstand state scrutiny. Of course, the CPUC could handle this issue as well as they handled the so-called power 'crisis' in the state last year. Is more regulation better than less?

disaster — Wed, 05 Sep 2001 07:37:55 -0800

Is this too good to be true? Last week when I called verizon to transfer my phone service, they suckered me into ordering this dsl service. What really got me, in addition to what they have listed on the site was the 30 day free trial, and that they supposedly use STATIC ip addresses. I was also told that their modem has a router built in that assigns individual ip addresses to each computer. [I have 3 - Windows server, Linux, and Mac]. Too good to be true, right?

sillygit — Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:06:45 -0800

PacBell seeks to secure a monopoly Californians urged to contact the PUC to put the brakes on PacBell's plan to kill the independent ISP. Should they be allowed to take their toys and go home or be forced to share? And, what effect will this have on the future of tech companies if PacBell is able to lock out DSL competition?