The telecom cartel would never do this, they said.

Netflix has agreed to pay one of the largest broadband providers in the United States Comcast Corp for faster speeds, throwing open the possibility that more content companies will have to shell out for better service.

Comcast and Netflix made the joint announcement on Sunday, marking the first time that Netflix is paying for faster speeds in the U.S. after customers complained about slow service. Terms of the deal were not disclosed.

The arrangement comes as federal regulators are wrestling with an issue known as “Net neutrality” concerning broadband providers and whether they can slow down traffic to particular websites, potentially forcing content companies to pay for faster Web service.

The Federal Communications Commission said last week it plans to rewrite the rules after a U.S. court struck down the commission’s previous version.

The issue is being closely watched as millions of people view movies and TV shows through streaming services offered by such companies like Netflix and Amazon.

Netflix, which got its start as a DVD-by-mail service, has 44 million subscribers worldwide and 34 million in the U.S. alone. About 7 million subscribers pay for mail delivery services.

The companies said in a statement that they have been “working collaboratively over many months” to strike a multi-year agreement. Netflix will not receive preferential network treatment, the companies said.

As part of the deal, Netflix will deliver its movies and TV programs to Comcast’s broadband network directly as opposed through third party providers, giving viewers faster streaming speeds for watching movies and TV programs.

It also could force Netflix to strike similar arrangements, known in the industry as interconnect agreements, with other major broadband providers like Verizon and AT&T.

With more than 44 million subscribers throughout the world, Netflix has been making an effort to connect directly with broadband Internet providers. It has struck similar deals with Cablevision and Cox, though Netflix did not pay for these connections.

The arrangement with Netflix comes on the heels of Comcast’s agreement to buy Time Warner Cable for $45 billion, a deal that will draw the scrutiny of U.S. antitrust enforcers.

The combined company would have a near 30 percent share of the U.S. pay television market, as well as be the major provider of broadband Internet access.

Who will revolt against The Com-Warnercast merger now that they can Netflix binge faster than ever?

Bread and fucking circuses.

¿Por qué nosotros debemos defender la cobertura universal del internet si (los de allá fuera) con las telenovelas tienen?

Nos afecta a todos el bloqueo del internet, y los demás errores de la Reforma en Telecomunicaciones, como: 

El principio de privacidad, en el sentido de que se otorgan facultades para VIGILAR (TODOS TUS MENSAJES) a los usuarios sin órdenes judiciales, además de almacenar datos personales; el principio de acceso, ya que busca BLOQUEAR, INHIBIR O ANULAR las señales de telecomunicaciones en eventos y lugares críticos para la seguridad pública y nacional a solicitud de las autoridades.

Internet puede -como herramienta- transformar las condiciones de injusticia y ampliar el campo de la conciencia; el plan de Peña Nieto es simple: tener el control mediante la tecnocracia. ¡NO a la #LeyTelecom

#Hellothree: Think different... and dare to be creative

#Hellothree: Think different… and dare to be creative

Think different… be creative

Over the last two weeks, while all the attention has been focused on the Apple iPhone 6 launch, I wanted to highlight the creative on UK-based Three’s latest ads. These adverts have been running over the last few weeks in British media. There are a number of versions and formats, all lamenting an individual’s sad story and how Three’s competitors (which are named –…

View On WordPress

Watch on

Dutch telecom company KPN offered iPhone 6 Plus owners a chance to “supersize” their pockets to avoid any #BendGate issues. With the help of a mobile tailor, they hit Apple Stores where people were queuing up to get their hands on the phone. Once there, they offered pocket alteration services to the people in line so that their new phones will fit perfectly in their pockets. 

Between the net neutrality debate and the Comcast/TWC merger, high-speed Internet access is getting more attention than ever. A lot of that attention is negative, and rightly so: Internet access providers, especially certain very large ones, have done a pretty good job of divvying up the nation to leave most Americans with only one or two choices for decent high-speed Internet access. Many of us don’t like those options.

That’s one reason folks have been looking to the FCC to enact neutrality rules. If there’s no competition, customers can’t vote with their wallets when ISPs behave badly. Beyond the neutrality issue, oligopolies also have little incentive to invest, not only in decent customer service, but also in building out world-class Internet infrastructure so that U.S. innovators can continue to compete internationally.

But guess what: we don’t have to rely entirely on the FCC to fix the problems with high-speed internet access. Around the country, local communities are taking charge of their own destiny, and supporting community fiber.  

Unfortunately, those communities face a number of barriers, from simple bureaucracy to state laws that impede a community’s ability to make its own decisions about how to improve its Internet access.  

We need to break those barriers. Community fiber, done right, should be a crucial part of the future of the Internet. To see why, let’s take a deeper dive.

What Is Community Fiber?
  • Fast, Cheap, and Community Controlled

People love to complain about the speed of their Internet access and with good reason.  International surveys regularly show that we pay more, for less, than many other countries. 

Fiber is fast. Really fast. Chattanooga’s local power utility operates a fiber optic Internet service that currently offers a 1 Gigabit speed package (1,000 Mbps) for just $69.99/month. For most of us that would be a 50x speed increase or better.  Many fiber services are also symmetrical, offering the same upload speed as download speed.

Fiber isn’t usually cheap, in part because the companies building it out have focused on business customers. But communities that have deployed residential fiber can typically offer rates that are equal to or cheaper than traditional residential competitors.

  • A Universe of Alternatives

As we noted above, in many communities there are only one or two choices for Internet access, most often the local monopoly cable company or the local monopoly telephone company. A recent report illustrated how much people hate these companies, but with no alternative, many continue to pay the Internet bill month after month. And the recent trends suggest that mergers between these giants will further consolidate one’s choices for Internet access.

Community fiber, properly deployed and managed, can give at least some of us a way out. One particularly attractive model is called “open access.” Under an open access model, the local municipality might be the owner of the fiber infrastructure, but agrees to lease access to the system to anyone on non-discriminatory terms. This opens up the possibility of having many local ISPs competing for your business over the same fiber infrastructure.

  • High Speed Access For All

The FCC’s 2011 Broadband Progress Report found that rural communities are particularly underserved when it comes to high-speed Internet access. Internet companies just don’t have the financial incentive to invest in building the networks.

Back in the cities, we continue to see “Digital Redlining.” Communities of color have been deemed “unprofitable” and “risky” for early private sector telecommunications investments, and often continue to be excluded from that essential private investment.

In contrast, many community fiber projects include a baseline level of service that is provided for free or include plans to build free open wireless networks on top of the fiber infrastructure. Community fiber projects can aim for and achieve truly universal access by taking the matter into their own hands.

  • Community Self-Reliance

Another motivator for some community fiber projects is the desire some communities have to be in charge of their own essential communications infrastructure. Rather than wait on an opportunity to win the Google Fiber lottery, they seek to proactively build the high-speed infrastructure their communities need. Many cities believe this is key for economic development, citing the business demand for fiber service.

The city of Santa Monica, California is a great example. Thanks, in part, to a city plan to build out their fiber network any time the streets were being dug up for any other purpose, Santa Monica, aka “Silicon Beach,” has become a hub for many technology companies and startups. 

  • "Smart" Cities of the Future, Here Today

Beyond the schools, libraries, hospitals, and emergency operation centers that municipalities want connected to a fiber network, municipalities also often have assets like traffic lights, parking meters, street lights, surveillance cameras, sprinklers, buses and so on that, if connected to the fiber network or open wireless enabled by that fiber network, can become part of a “smart city” where software controls enable new efficiencies.

Imagine the Director of Public Works using her smart phone to reschedule all the sprinklers in the city with just a few clicks. Proponents argue that in 20 years a city without such a fiber network will seem to us today like a city without paved roads. In this future, that a firefighter might not be able to instantly download a building’s blueprints right from the scene of the blaze will seem unthinkable.

Challenges Facing Community Fiber

Given the benefits of community fiber, the increasing need for high-speed Internet access, and the simultaneously decreasing number of alternatives, why don’t we all have it?  Therein lie some lessons and opportunities.   

  • Some Cities Have Tied Their Own Hands.

The Berkman Center at Harvard recently released a report that detailed the sad situation in the District of Columbia, which has a robust fiber network that it cannot provide to its own businesses or residents. In 1999, as part of Comcast’s franchise renewal negotiations, Comcast offered to provide the District with exclusive use of a portion of its private fiber loop. In exchange, the District agreed not to sell or lease the fiber and not to “engage in any activities or outcomes that would result in business competition between the District and Comcast or that may result in loss of business opportunity for Comcast.”

Comcast effectively reneged on its part of the deal, but for complicated reasons the District was still stuck with the “non-compete” obligation. A recent article suggested that hundreds of municipalities have made similar non-compete agreements that may impede a community fiber rollout.

  • Twenty States Have Laws That Ban or Hinder Community Fiber

Some states have, typically under intense lobbying efforts by incumbent interests, enacted laws that ban or hinder municipalities from pursuing their own fiber projects.

Fortunately FCC Chairman, Tom Wheeler, has recently made numerous comments indicating that he believes the FCC has the authority to preempt such state laws to enable greater local competition. Two communities affected by them have petitioned the FCC to take action. You can tell the FCC your thoughts about this.

  • There Are Good Reasons Not to Want the Government to be Your ISP

Just because a local municipality might own the fiber infrastructure does not necessarily mean it is also best-suited to act as an ISP to residents. Residents might rightly wonder what sort of information sharing practices would become policy, particularly information sharing with law enforcement.

This challenge can be addressed as well. Cities can help resolve privacy concerns by adopting the open access model described above. On this model the local municipality merely leases the fiber and never has to have access to the data on the fiber. Local ISPs that lease the fiber can be held accountable by users that encourage the ISPs to adopt privacy-protecting policies and terms of service.

  • Expect Opposition from the Incumbents

Any locality that pursues a community fiber project should be prepared to hear how the sky is falling from the incumbent monopolies. Past experience shows that they will fight hard against anything that might bring about more competition and hence a reduction to their bottom lines. Incumbents may raise various specious arguments and advocates and decision-makers will need to understand and be prepared with counter-arguments. We are preparing a community fiber toolkit for local activists that will help. 


Community Fiber can play a role in addressing several important problems facing widespread high-speed Internet access, but it faces many challenges as well. Each community will need to tailor its approach to their local circumstances and will want to learn from the experiences of those that have tread this path already. We hope we can raise this issue’s profile and shine a light on a path forward.

Device is a smartphone, tablet, laptop, desktop and smart TV in one

Owning a number of different devices can often mean having to regularly transfer data between them to keep them synced, or storing private information in the cloud. Offering a truly connected alternative, Seed is a set of mobile and computer products that use the processing power and data of a single docked smartphone. READ MORE…

Comcast deliberately throttled user access to Netflix at the end of 2013. Then at the beginning of 2014, they announce that they’ve reached a “deal” with Netflix to give them [back] high speed access. Weeks after this deal, Netflix announced that it would raise the cost of subscription.

Extortion is only protected when the government permits it. I won’t pretend that I look up to the government to enforce the principles behind Net Neutrality, but if consumers do not become more conscientious about their economic decisions, the freedom of access to information will be in peril.

The lack of Net Neutrality principles effectively give an advantage to internet service providers and telecom giants who are willing (and able) to make deals with broadband providers.  This obviously presents small companies with the disadvantage of operating on a slower network. Inevitably, a world without net neutrality wouldn’t reward the most innovative website with the best services but rather the companies that are best at making deals, or the companies with the most money.

Abandoning the principles behind Net Neutrality leaves us consumers with a couple serious consequences: for starters, it will stifle innovation. Small companies and new web startups wouldn’t just have to worry about winning over consumers with a good idea; they’d also have to figure out how to pay FOR THE PRIVILEGE of being accessible to a consumer-base. Those costs also trickle down to the consumer, as is the case with Netflix. Preferential treatment for the existing telecom industry won’t just stifle innovation, it will bring competition to a halt entirely.

Watch on

Do you know what is happening in México? A global call for freedom


On April 21 just use #EPNvsInternet to help us to create a Global Storm to defend freedom speech
On 22 & 26 we will take the streets

Como alterar as senhas no Elastix

Dependendo da situação é necessário modificar todas as senhas no Elastix, como as senhas do MySQL, FreePBX, FOP, A2Billing, VTigerCRM, etc.

Na restauração de um backup num outro servidor Elastix, as senhas devem ser as mesmas, senão não vai acontecer a restauração. Esse é um dos casos que necessitamos alterar as senhas, caso sejam diferentes.

Para alterar as senhas no Elastix você pode digitar o seguinte comando no Linux:

elastix-admin-passwords —change

Watch on

Former FBI Agent implies that phone companies record conversations on CNN 

— —

So here is this. It is old footage, and not part of the recent news cycle where it was revealed that NSA are “reaching into the past" recording the actual content of calls from a number of countries. It has been in front of you the whole time. I am surprised people were shocked by it.

Personally, I have always assumed that everything I said on the phone was being recorded and parsed by some robot doing speech-to-text translations and then running that against a list of keywords or phrases. 

Call me paranoid… but who is laughing now eh? :P A lot of people eating crow these days.. :)

Andy Müller-Maguhn from Chaos Computer Club said in an interview with Jullian Assange (pt. 2 is here) that you could record the entire voice traffic of Germany for a few hundred million dollars in a few of racks of servers. No gigantic Utah Data Center required.

Traditional plain old telephone service (POTS) “Landline” copper plant and circuit switched voice call bandwidth is only 3 kilohertz (3 kHz). If we bump that up to 6, or even 16(!) to account for overhead, the storage requirements are still incredibly small. Digital cellular and mobile connections are even worse due to aggressive compression (that makes everyone sound like they are waving light sabers around while talking under water into a tin can!).

When a Nation State spends billions on warfare, corporate welfare and “normal” bureaucratic waste every single day, the cost to wiretap and record every piece of voice traffic in the World are even less significant in retrospect.

What can I get with $2.3 trillion?" indeed.

~ P