Many of the websites you visit use Google either directly or indirectly as their ad provider so using Google as your ISP will change the advertising you see on many sites. You'll see remarkably well targeted ads linked to your internet history and current location.
Currently many people block or delete cookies. If Google is your ISP they won't need cookies to track you.
I also think it's likely that you'll need a Google ID (and thus all the free Google services) to use Google as your ISP. Sure you can choose not to use Gmail, Google+, etc. but it'll be there and by watching everything you do Google will probably be able to create a Google+ identity for you that's at least as accurate as the one you'd create for yourself.
Well targeted ads set off my creepy stalker alarm. My solution is to boycott any business that seems to know too much about me.
And the worst you see happening is you get an ad for something you might actually have an interest in rather than one you don't?
Being a network guy I can't stand when I hear T1 in a recent movies to TV shows described as being fast.
I thought T1 died around the time I upgraded our 'Atlantic T1 line' (Europe <> US) to something snappier, some 12 years ago. Don't tell me it's still being sold!
You'd figure they'd at least say T3 by now. Fact is T1s are still in high use today. There's never any slowdown and most telcos guarantee any outage to be of less than 24 hours.
T1 original refer to the T-carrier line so I technically I guess one could say T1 and mean more than T1 and much as or more than 28 to make a DS-3 (T3) but I don't think I've ever heard anyone in the industry since I started that used it an ambiguous way so I could be making a composition fallacy*.
The only example I can recall to the contrary of my original post is from the movie Swordfish (2001) which I believe had John Travolta character state they had 2 DS-3 lines (89.472Mb/s) coming to a house. As great as that might be the guy was doing torrents but what appeared to be small amounts of code. I'm not even sure you could get that much bandwidth without sending up some major red flags but I overlooked it because Halle Berry got topless.
I've never heard OC lines mentioned in any TV or movie that I can recall. That's got some amazing speeds with modern fiber channels.
They indicated that they do plan on expanding their gigabit internet in their earnings call. At $70/month, I don't think they're that reliant on ads to support it.
They are very dependent on government handouts to get to the $70/month. Given the 100+ employees KC had to hire to do work the ISPs normal does (permits and such), the free office space, the city doing trenching, not needing equal access (being able to cherry pick neighborhoods) and Google being able to use utility polls off limits to the competition the $70/month is about half what it would cost under a free market.
T1 original refer to the T-carrier line so I technically I guess one could say T1 and mean more than T1 and much as or more than 28 to make a DS-3 (T3) but I don't think I've ever heard anyone in the industry since I started that used it an ambiguous way so I could be making a composition fallacy*.
The only example I can recall to the contrary of my original post is from the movie Swordfish (2001) which I believe had John Travolta character state they had 2 DS-3 lines (89.472Mb/s) coming to a house. As great as that might be the guy was doing torrents but what appeared to be small amounts of code. I'm not even sure you could get that much bandwidth without sending up some major red flags but I overlooked it because Halle Berry got topless.
I've never heard OC lines mentioned in any TV or movie that I can recall. That's got some amazing speeds with modern fiber channels.
I thought T1 died around the time I upgraded our 'Atlantic T1 line' (Europe <> US) to something snappier, some 12 years ago. Don't tell me it's still being sold!
Of course. Not everyone needs more than that. Heck, I know companies that still use fractions of a T1.
I did recently hear "cut the fiber" but cannot recall what movie it was.
Here's a huge hint...
Spoiler:
[outside the Stock Exchange building SWAT team arrives along with Foley]
Exchange Security Chief: You've gotta get in there!
Foley: This is a hostage situation.
Exchange Security Chief: No! No! No! This is a robbery! They have direct access to the online trading desk.
Foley: I'm not risking my men for your money.
[just then Blake arrives and goes over to a construction vehicle]
Blake: Sir, we're gonna have to ask you to move, we have a situation here.
[back to the security chief and Foley]
Exchange Security Chief: It's not our money, it's everybody's!
Foley: Really? Mine's in my mattress.
Exchange Security Chief: If you don't put these guys down, that stuffing in your mattress might be worth a whole hell of a lot less.
Foley: Cut the fiber cable and takeout that cell tower.
Exchange Security Chief: Thank you.
Foley: That'll slow 'em down.
[back in the stock exchange building]
Shoe Shine Man at GSE: They cut the fiber. Cell's working.
Bane: For now.
I hadn't remembered it until I looked it up which was surprising easy to do. I fully expected to spend at least a couple minutes hunting it down. Way to go people on the internet with nothing better to do than to post movie scripts.
Wish they'd focus more on the landline gigabit Internet they promised. You know, build that out, terrify the existing Internet providers, force them to upgrade their services, and then whatever happens happens.
If Google winds up being my ISP, I'm fine with that. Sure, they'll look at absolutely everything I do, but they can't do squat with it! I don't use any Google services, so I won't be served any ads based on anything I've surfed! They can't make any money off me that way, and their advertisers will learn that!
"So they'll just inject ad HTML pages in between every 50th URL you visit."
And that will instantly destroy that part of their company, leaving behind an upgraded infrastructure taken over by honorable (well, less disreputable) companies. No one would accept their browsing being hijacked by their ISP for the purpose of serving ads.
Even if I try to avoid any of google'd services the thought alone they could enter the ISP market gives me the creeps. Maybe heave users of google services get "express lanes" = faster connections. Or users more willing to share what they do. Or they provide a "tailored" view on the Internet and there is stuff you somehow never get to see. Just like google results are not the same for everybody already today and no one seems to care.
Regarding downgrading services by introducing ads: look at what we are already willing to accept right now. It is just a matter of gradually introducing it...
ohh existing telcos are just gonna love little Larry. All talkey no walkey no infrastructure. Seriously - google has nothing but software and only in webspace. err apart from the servers behind the scenes to better deliver more meaningful ads to augment your browsing experience. :-) Little Larry keeps on innovating and talking the bubble up.
Just crap - noise - click throughs phhhst
Who is he gonna have a crack at next ? if he is to be believed all ad agencies are doomed. They know nothing. Nothing needs to advertised nor promoted other than his model - some kind of hokey web stats.
ohh existing telcos are just gonna love little Larry. All talkey no walkey no infrastructure.
Seriously - google has nothing but software and only in webspace. err apart from the servers behind the scenes to better deliver more meaningful ads to augment your browsing experience. :-)
Little Larry keeps on innovating and talking the bubble up.
Just crap - noise - click throughs phhhst
Who is he gonna have a crack at next ? if he is to be believed all ad agencies are doomed. They know nothing. Nothing needs to advertised nor promoted other than his model - some kind of hokey web stats.
Long ago, and far away...
I remember hearing the story of a candidate for office creating a public outcry that the incumbent was inappropiayely (illegally?) using his office to obtain access to public records in order create voter lists...
...As the story went, the candidate stopped complaining when asked: "Where do you think you got your lists?"
This is getting a bit scary when you consider that Google will (does already?) have information at its fingertips that could be used to "lobby" public officials how to vote on any "cause" it chooses...
The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.
-Vladimir Ilyich Lenin-
[outside the Stock Exchange building SWAT team arrives along with Foley]
Exchange Security Chief: You've gotta get in there!
Foley: This is a hostage situation.
Exchange Security Chief: No! No! No! This is a robbery! They have direct access to the online trading desk.
Foley: I'm not risking my men for your money.
[just then Blake arrives and goes over to a construction vehicle]
Blake: Sir, we're gonna have to ask you to move, we have a situation here.
[back to the security chief and Foley]
Exchange Security Chief: It's not our money, it's everybody's!
Foley: Really? Mine's in my mattress.
Exchange Security Chief: If you don't put these guys down, that stuffing in your mattress might be worth a whole hell of a lot less.
Foley: Cut the fiber cable and takeout that cell tower.
Exchange Security Chief: Thank you.
Foley: That'll slow 'em down.
[back in the stock exchange building]
Shoe Shine Man at GSE: They cut the fiber. Cell's working.
Bane: For now.
I hadn't remembered it until I looked it up which was surprising easy to do. I fully expected to spend at least a couple minutes hunting it down. Way to go people on the internet with nothing better to do than to post movie scripts.
Sprint now completely controls Clearwire which uses the 2.5Ghz frequency. That was used for Wimax but will now be turned into LTE moving forward.
From an article: "Clearwire's 2.5GHz spectrum is uniquely positioned to be used as a global LTE band, provided a certain band configuration is used.
Is the 2,5 Ghz any good? I thought everyone wanted the lower frequencies in that 700 Mhz auction because the lower frequency penetrated buildings for better signal strength. Many people thought Google was going to bid on the 700 band back then but they opted not to. Seems odd that they would now decide to get into the carrier business after passing on the the coveted 700 band auction.
Is the 2,5 Ghz any good? I thought everyone wanted the lower frequencies in that 700 Mhz auction because the lower frequency penetrated buildings for better signal strength. Many people thought Google was going to bid on the 700 band back then but they opted not to. Seems odd that they would now decide to get into the carrier business after passing on the the coveted 700 band auction.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad
Many of the websites you visit use Google either directly or indirectly as their ad provider so using Google as your ISP will change the advertising you see on many sites. You'll see remarkably well targeted ads linked to your internet history and current location.
Currently many people block or delete cookies. If Google is your ISP they won't need cookies to track you.
I also think it's likely that you'll need a Google ID (and thus all the free Google services) to use Google as your ISP. Sure you can choose not to use Gmail, Google+, etc. but it'll be there and by watching everything you do Google will probably be able to create a Google+ identity for you that's at least as accurate as the one you'd create for yourself.
Well targeted ads set off my creepy stalker alarm. My solution is to boycott any business that seems to know too much about me.
And the worst you see happening is you get an ad for something you might actually have an interest in rather than one you don't?
I thought T1 died around the time I upgraded our 'Atlantic T1 line' (Europe <> US) to something snappier, some 12 years ago. Don't tell me it's still being sold!
T1 original refer to the T-carrier line so I technically I guess one could say T1 and mean more than T1 and much as or more than 28 to make a DS-3 (T3) but I don't think I've ever heard anyone in the industry since I started that used it an ambiguous way so I could be making a composition fallacy*.
The only example I can recall to the contrary of my original post is from the movie Swordfish (2001) which I believe had John Travolta character state they had 2 DS-3 lines (89.472Mb/s) coming to a house. As great as that might be the guy was doing torrents but what appeared to be small amounts of code. I'm not even sure you could get that much bandwidth without sending up some major red flags but I overlooked it because Halle Berry got topless.
I've never heard OC lines mentioned in any TV or movie that I can recall. That's got some amazing speeds with modern fiber channels.
* Wikipedia has a comprehensive list of fallacies. I've help write and edit many of them so I vouch for their correctiudedness: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
/shrug, I'm paying $40/month for 50mbit right now and I feel its too expensive; I live in an metropolitan area tho, so I might be a bit spoiled =P
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo
They indicated that they do plan on expanding their gigabit internet in their earnings call. At $70/month, I don't think they're that reliant on ads to support it.
They are very dependent on government handouts to get to the $70/month. Given the 100+ employees KC had to hire to do work the ISPs normal does (permits and such), the free office space, the city doing trenching, not needing equal access (being able to cherry pick neighborhoods) and Google being able to use utility polls off limits to the competition the $70/month is about half what it would cost under a free market.
I did recently hear "cut the fiber" but cannot recall what movie it was.
Of course. Not everyone needs more than that. Heck, I know companies that still use fractions of a T1.
Here's a huge hint...
Exchange Security Chief: You've gotta get in there!
Foley: This is a hostage situation.
Exchange Security Chief: No! No! No! This is a robbery! They have direct access to the online trading desk.
Foley: I'm not risking my men for your money.
[just then Blake arrives and goes over to a construction vehicle]
Blake: Sir, we're gonna have to ask you to move, we have a situation here.
[back to the security chief and Foley]
Exchange Security Chief: It's not our money, it's everybody's!
Foley: Really? Mine's in my mattress.
Exchange Security Chief: If you don't put these guys down, that stuffing in your mattress might be worth a whole hell of a lot less.
Foley: Cut the fiber cable and takeout that cell tower.
Exchange Security Chief: Thank you.
Foley: That'll slow 'em down.
[back in the stock exchange building]
Shoe Shine Man at GSE: They cut the fiber. Cell's working.
Bane: For now.
I hadn't remembered it until I looked it up which was surprising easy to do. I fully expected to spend at least a couple minutes hunting it down. Way to go people on the internet with nothing better to do than to post movie scripts.
roflmao - composition fallacy = rdf
cheers
Even if I try to avoid any of google'd services the thought alone they could enter the ISP market gives me the creeps. Maybe heave users of google services get "express lanes" = faster connections. Or users more willing to share what they do. Or they provide a "tailored" view on the Internet and there is stuff you somehow never get to see. Just like google results are not the same for everybody already today and no one seems to care.
Regarding downgrading services by introducing ads: look at what we are already willing to accept right now. It is just a matter of gradually introducing it...
Seriously - google has nothing but software and only in webspace. err apart from the servers behind the scenes to better deliver more meaningful ads to augment your browsing experience. :-)
Little Larry keeps on innovating and talking the bubble up.
Just crap - noise - click throughs phhhst
Who is he gonna have a crack at next ? if he is to be believed all ad agencies are doomed. They know nothing. Nothing needs to advertised nor promoted other than his model - some kind of hokey web stats.
Long ago, and far away...
I remember hearing the story of a candidate for office creating a public outcry that the incumbent was inappropiayely (illegally?) using his office to obtain access to public records in order create voter lists...
...As the story went, the candidate stopped complaining when asked: "Where do you think you got your lists?"
This is getting a bit scary when you consider that Google will (does already?) have information at its fingertips that could be used to "lobby" public officials how to vote on any "cause" it chooses...
Riddle me this Batman.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac
Sprint now completely controls Clearwire which uses the 2.5Ghz frequency. That was used for Wimax but will now be turned into LTE moving forward.
From an article: "Clearwire's 2.5GHz spectrum is uniquely positioned to be used as a global LTE band, provided a certain band configuration is used.
Is the 2,5 Ghz any good? I thought everyone wanted the lower frequencies in that 700 Mhz auction because the lower frequency penetrated buildings for better signal strength. Many people thought Google was going to bid on the 700 band back then but they opted not to. Seems odd that they would now decide to get into the carrier business after passing on the the coveted 700 band auction.
They don't have much of a choice now.
Ain't it the truth, for so many. And your stance on this gets further cemented because you signed up just to get this out. Welcome to the forum.