Re: multiplexing -- don't do it

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Adrien W. de Croy <adrien@qbik.com> wrote:

>
> ------ Original Message ------
> From: "Roberto Peon" grmocg@gmail.com
>
>
>
>>
>> Maybe we need a better way to force a client to use a proxy, and take the
>> pain out of it for administration.  And do it securely (just remembering
>> why 305 was deprecated).
>>
>
> like normal proxy configuration?
>
>
> you ever worked on an ISP support desk?
>

Umm, actually I have.


>
> These are people who can hardly use a mouse you're trying to get them to
> set up proxy config in their browser?
>
>

I'm familiar with these kinds of people and working with them. I'd imagine
that the ISP would give them an installer which would find and set config
for these programs without the user having to do it themselves or something
similarly easy.


>
> Assuming proxies were not explicit, what do you propose the users do the
> ISP begins filtering and censoring content for reasons of greed?
> -=R
>
>
> More likely due to statutory requirements.  You guys may think you dodged
> a bullet with SOPA... other countries you wouldn't expect have already
> passed laws requiring censorship by ISPs
>
> It's not an issue that's going away either.
>

You're assuming that the ISP's incentives align with the user? I don't. I
imagine there are some out there who do and are, but on the whole, if
the capability to make more money exists from installing a box that does
something to the user's traffic, I'd expect that it gets done.
Off the top of my head, they can inspect what is going on and sell the data
of people's behaviors. You could also degrade the service quality for any
site that was in competition with any that your company (or affiliate)
provided. Note well that these have already happened. This is NOT
theoretical.

-=R


>
>
>
>
>