"I do want to have a series of increasingly far out treatments tried on me until I either get better or die. In the likely case that the treatments don’t work, useful knowledge about their toxicity or lack of efficacy will have been obtained. If one of them does, I get to blog about it."
That is what we all think and want.
BECAUSE WE ARE NOT THERE.
The sad reality is that the closer you are to death, the more you want to live.
I guess the biggest punishment for the "original sin" (if the story is true) was not to be obliged to live on earth, but being obliged to "Live", that is to have a body who is born and has to die.
God has no body, God was never born, God will never die, God just lives without sadness, without pain.
The right to live, the right to die.
Sometimes it is the pain to live and the pain to die.
May be pain has a big advantage: it makes us seeing death as something good and welcome.
While if you are happy and love life, then death becomes dreadful and scaring.
Religion and the belief in something good after death should make us less unwilling to die.
But that is not the case.
It is not the case even for the Pope, who should be believer number 1st.
I think that if he really lived like the Christian he wants to show to be, he would spend all the useful money he spends for himself to help all the suffering people of this world.
That would be the real lesson of Christianity.
And I do not want to be polemic; I just want to be realistic.
And reality teaches us that we all, including the Pope, fear and dread that moment.
Lucky Terry, she doesn't understand that her Time has come since long.
She doesn't have the Right to die, she has the Luck to leave this life in the way she entered it: without knowing.
Friday, March 25, 2005
Sunday, March 13, 2005
The algorithm behind the algorithm.The appeal of "Sex".
Tom Evslin writes:
So, after blogging yesterday about pornography and using loaded words like "sex" and "skin flicks", I couldn't wait to what kinds of ads Google AdSense would serve up on my site. I knew there'd be nothing hardcore - this is Google - but I wasn't prepared for what I saw.
Three out of the five ads are for engines or engine rebuilding. After much puzzling, I have two theories, probably both wrong:
I did say "Pornography Drives Technology"; could the word "drive" lead to ads for engines?
More interesting, I said that pornography appeals to the same demographic as technology - young men. But, of course, so does engine rebuilding. So maybe Google serves engines whenever anyone mentions "sex" - a search engine version of sublimation.
Patrizia:
May be it understands humanity more than what we think.
When you say: "pornography appeals to the same demographic as technology - young men", it assumes that your blog's customers are exactly that: young men interested in technology, also as a way to sex.
The Internet is becoming a widespread entertainment medium, and sex plays a big part in it. (the Internet is but a mirror of its users, a mirror of life, where of course sex plays a big role)
On the other end, we are in the year 2005 and we still see sex as something "dirty", "forbidden".
We are more than ever slaves of a certain religion which denies the evidence of nature.
"For two thousand years or more man has been subject to a systematic effort to transform him in an ascetic animal.
Parental discipline, religious denunciation of bodily pleasure and philosophic exaltation of the life of reason have all left man overtly docile, but secretly in his unconscious unconvinced.
In spite of two thousand years of higher education, based on the notion that man is essentially a soul for misterious accidental reasons, man still thinks of himself as first and foremost a body and looks for the fullfillment of the happiness of his own body."
This is the truth and will always be the truth.
And so, if you write about sex in your blog, the choice of ads is virtually unlimited: because Sex is a Universal Language and talks to everybody...
Patrizia from a World on IP and also, why not, a World on Sex...
So, after blogging yesterday about pornography and using loaded words like "sex" and "skin flicks", I couldn't wait to what kinds of ads Google AdSense would serve up on my site. I knew there'd be nothing hardcore - this is Google - but I wasn't prepared for what I saw.
Three out of the five ads are for engines or engine rebuilding. After much puzzling, I have two theories, probably both wrong:
I did say "Pornography Drives Technology"; could the word "drive" lead to ads for engines?
More interesting, I said that pornography appeals to the same demographic as technology - young men. But, of course, so does engine rebuilding. So maybe Google serves engines whenever anyone mentions "sex" - a search engine version of sublimation.
Patrizia:
May be it understands humanity more than what we think.
When you say: "pornography appeals to the same demographic as technology - young men", it assumes that your blog's customers are exactly that: young men interested in technology, also as a way to sex.
The Internet is becoming a widespread entertainment medium, and sex plays a big part in it. (the Internet is but a mirror of its users, a mirror of life, where of course sex plays a big role)
On the other end, we are in the year 2005 and we still see sex as something "dirty", "forbidden".
We are more than ever slaves of a certain religion which denies the evidence of nature.
"For two thousand years or more man has been subject to a systematic effort to transform him in an ascetic animal.
Parental discipline, religious denunciation of bodily pleasure and philosophic exaltation of the life of reason have all left man overtly docile, but secretly in his unconscious unconvinced.
In spite of two thousand years of higher education, based on the notion that man is essentially a soul for misterious accidental reasons, man still thinks of himself as first and foremost a body and looks for the fullfillment of the happiness of his own body."
This is the truth and will always be the truth.
And so, if you write about sex in your blog, the choice of ads is virtually unlimited: because Sex is a Universal Language and talks to everybody...
Patrizia from a World on IP and also, why not, a World on Sex...
Thursday, March 10, 2005
TELETRUTH ALERT
If you care about broadband, the Internet, Wi-Fi and wireless,
municipalities wiring cities, the cost of phone service, VOIP, open
access to content, or anything else related to your Digital Future,
you need to read this.
Then check out the materials and take actions to call for
investigations.
You've already been harmed.
WHAT'S BEHIND THE CURTAIN: There is an underground network of
political deceit in the telecom and broadband industry. It is made up
of very well funded fake or co-opted consumer groups, research firms,
lobbying groups, politicians and PR firms throughout the United
States, that are out to fool reporters, state legislatures, Congress,
the public and the FCC that they represent the public interest.
In fact, many are controlled or have been co-opted through Sam Simon's
Issue Dynamics and paid for by SBC, Verizon, BellSouth and the other
phone and cable companies. The list of groups includes APT, TRAC,
USIIA, Connect USA, New Millennium Research Council, League of United
Latin American Citizens, and American Association of People With
Disabilities, among others
It is also the co-opting of well known groups, from the Gray Panthers
and NAACP, to the National Council of La Raza, the National Consumer
League and others.
Call it skunkworks, (the phone companies' black-ops groups) call it
astroturf, call it sock puppets, a consortium of groups -- run by
Issue Dynamics, includes a host of non-profits directly funded by the
Bell companies to wield undo influence --not in your favor. These
groups are do the bidding of the Bell companies, not you.
And the impacts? They have helped to raise your phone rates, they've
blocked fiber-optic and Wi-Fi initiatives in various states, they have
helped to close down investigations of wrong doing by the phone
companies, including audits of the companies showing customer
overcharging and cooked books, and have helped to put competitors out
of business.
The phone companies, through these groups, have also been able to
shape or control new state laws or public service commission actions,
as well as federal legislation and FCC actions.
They have, in essence, subverted the democratic process and stolen
your right to be properly represented -- and you should resent it. And
the sad part is that Washington insiders all know this is happening.
It's common knowledge in the Beltway, and they have not stepped in to
stop it.
Some examples:
1) Control of the FCC: Did you know that the FCC Consumer Advisory
Committee is mainly comprised of phone, cable and broadcast interests.
In the last session, 1/3 of the members are from the industry or their
associations. However, there were also 6 different groups tied to Sam
Simon and Issue Dynamics.This has helped to give the phone companies
control of the consumer interests at the FCC. It is the reason phone
bills are unreadable, or competitors are being put out of business or
sold off.
March 8th, 2005, the FCC announced the new members of this Committtee.
It
includes:
* Alliance for Public Technology, Daniel Phythyon: is Senior Vice
President, Law and Policy at the United States Telecom
Association ("USTA").
APT is funded by Verizon and BellSouth and SBC APT is run by
Sam
Simon's Issue Dynamics. Other members, still on the Committee,
also
have ties to Sam Simon and Issue Dynamics.
* National Association of Broadcasters, Sprint Corporation,
Time Warner,
T-Mobile, Verizon, Nextel Communications, Inc., Cellular
Telecommunications
and Internet Association, and Consumer Electronics
Association,
2) Raising Phone Rates: In 2000, the phone company coalition, known as
the "CALLs Coalition", got over 40 consumer groups who agreed to raise
the FCC Line Charge -- on every local phone bill in America --- from a
cap of $3.50 to $6.50. Issue Dynamics helped to run a campaign to make
consumer groups believe this increase was important and good for their
constituents, claiming it would lower long phone rates. --- It didn't
work for most Americans. Interestingly, almost all of the groups also
got grants from the phone companies.
* "Verizon has worked closely with the National Consumers League
(NCL) to
create and update consumer web pages explaining common
telecommunications
charges." Sam Simon is the current Chairman of the National
Consumer League.
The NCL is on the FCC Consumer Advisory Committee.
* Other groups backing this were NAACP, (an Issue Dynamics client
and on the
APT board) the National Hispanic Council on Aging and American
Association
of People with Disabilities, both on the APT board. All three
got grants and
donations from the Bell companies.
The FCC, in 2005, is currently proposing to raise this charge to
$10.00 --- and guess who they will listen to?
3) Wi-Fi and Municipalities -- Recently, Wi-Fi Network News and others
have outlined how Issue Dynamics, APT and the New Millennium Research
Council (a project of Issue Dynamics) have been issuing reports
bashing municipalities ability to offer broadband and Wi-Fi Internet
services. This data is being using in multiple states throughout the
US to make state legislatures vote against competition. Go to the site
to read more.
4) Harm to Competition and Broadband --- Questionable or co-opted
consumer groups have helped to give exclusive rights for broadband
networks to the phone companies -- SBC and Verizon. For example,
American's For a Digital Divide in 2001, with APT, were supporters of
the Bell broadband proposals that essentially harmed competitors. The
group included:
* World Institute on Disability, (Verizon's Foundation is a member
and Simon
is on the board), American Association of People With
Disabilities, (got
"major donations from both Verizon and the Verizon Foundation,
and put a
Verizon VP on its own board") and the National Association of
the Deaf, a
Sam Simon/Issue Dynamics' client.
5) TRAC and APT, with the help of fake and co-opted groups and bad
research, helped the phone companies enter the long distance markets,
as well as harm competitors.
* TRAC and APT helped Verizon and SBC enter the long distance
market, which
helped to put AT&T and MCI up for sale -- they couldn't compete.
Sam Simon
is founder of TRAC, APT is run by Issue Dynamics. TRAC, a
nonprofit, has
been running at a suspicious loss for years.
* Issue Dynamics got the Gray Panthers to go after MCI in a full
page
advertisement and staged fake rallies. They also enlisted the
United Church
of Christ for other attacks. APT and the United Church of Christ
work
together on projects including the "Everett C. Parker Ethics In
Telecommunications Lectures" (stop laughing.)
6) VOIP and Universal Service Fund (USF) --- APT has helped to create
the "Keep USF FAIR Coalition", with full page adds in USA Today, in
February 2005. In 2004, APT created the VOIP Coalition (Voice over the
Internet).
Both are filled with a mixture of the same players and their positions
are related to the phone companies' needs. For example, instead of
demanding an investigation into the problem-ridden Universal Service
Fund, this group wants what's fair for the phone companies ---
increase the USF, but leave it alone.
* Groups signed onto these campaigns include: APT, American
Association of
People with Disabilities, National Hispanic Council on Aging,
Telecommunications for the Deaf, TRAC, and World Institute on
Disability.
The list goes on and on. --- In some cases, these groups are merely
fronts for the phone companies interests. In other cases, we believe
they've been duped, co-opting authentic consumer groups for the phone
companies'
purposes. However, in ALL cases, the outcome has been to not
investigate the phone companies' behavior and sign on to Bell-friendly
activities that ended up with higher phone rates, a national lack of
fiber-based broadband, and harm to competition, as well as new threats
to the Wi-Fi rollout, municipalities offering services, or new
technologies, such as VOIP.
Let us be clear --- To date we have found no illegal acts. Also, many
of these groups have done great activities for the public interest.
And, we have no problem with non-profits taking money from a large
corporation to fund a public interest activity. However, when these
same groups vote and use their name to promote the activities of the
large corporation, especially when they do not fully disclose the
money received or fail to first consider the needs of their own
constituency, then the country should be outraged and these activities
investigated. While many groups will counter that the phone companies
only represent a percentage of their income, it is now clear that it
represents 100% of their favoritism on telecommunications and
broadband issues. Should they have nonprofit status?
Are they doing illegal-unethical acts?
TAKE ACTION:
A) Go to http://www.newnetworks.com/skunkworks101.html and learn more
--
Don't take our word for it. We've put links to articles and documents
by others, including TRAC's IRS financials, ties between groups, etc.
TAKE ACTION: http://www.newnetworks.com/takethefccback.html
B) Join us in our Complaint to Congress to investigate the FCC
Consumer Advisory Committee's board members. Read the government's
report questioning the FCC's Committee process. --- The new Committee,
announced March 8th, 2005 is still filled with phone companies and
astro-turfers.
C) Complain about nonprofit status and co-mingling of funds for
questionable
groups: Why are fake groups, research firms, etc. getting a free ride
as 501c3, nonprofit groups? Billions of dollars are at stake. Read the
IRS information about restrictions on lobbying.
D) Call for investigations of this problem --- This same scam is
happening in other industries as well, from the fake environmental
groups set up by the oil companies, to the astroturf groups designed
to torpedo health care reform. Read what others have been writing on
this.
Bruce Kushnick, Teletruth, bruce@teletruth.org Tom Allibone,
Teletruth, tom@teletruth.org
PS: Teletruth was a member of the FCC Consumer Advisory Committee in
2003-2004. We were not invited back in 2005.
municipalities wiring cities, the cost of phone service, VOIP, open
access to content, or anything else related to your Digital Future,
you need to read this.
Then check out the materials and take actions to call for
investigations.
You've already been harmed.
WHAT'S BEHIND THE CURTAIN: There is an underground network of
political deceit in the telecom and broadband industry. It is made up
of very well funded fake or co-opted consumer groups, research firms,
lobbying groups, politicians and PR firms throughout the United
States, that are out to fool reporters, state legislatures, Congress,
the public and the FCC that they represent the public interest.
In fact, many are controlled or have been co-opted through Sam Simon's
Issue Dynamics and paid for by SBC, Verizon, BellSouth and the other
phone and cable companies. The list of groups includes APT, TRAC,
USIIA, Connect USA, New Millennium Research Council, League of United
Latin American Citizens, and American Association of People With
Disabilities, among others
It is also the co-opting of well known groups, from the Gray Panthers
and NAACP, to the National Council of La Raza, the National Consumer
League and others.
Call it skunkworks, (the phone companies' black-ops groups) call it
astroturf, call it sock puppets, a consortium of groups -- run by
Issue Dynamics, includes a host of non-profits directly funded by the
Bell companies to wield undo influence --not in your favor. These
groups are do the bidding of the Bell companies, not you.
And the impacts? They have helped to raise your phone rates, they've
blocked fiber-optic and Wi-Fi initiatives in various states, they have
helped to close down investigations of wrong doing by the phone
companies, including audits of the companies showing customer
overcharging and cooked books, and have helped to put competitors out
of business.
The phone companies, through these groups, have also been able to
shape or control new state laws or public service commission actions,
as well as federal legislation and FCC actions.
They have, in essence, subverted the democratic process and stolen
your right to be properly represented -- and you should resent it. And
the sad part is that Washington insiders all know this is happening.
It's common knowledge in the Beltway, and they have not stepped in to
stop it.
Some examples:
1) Control of the FCC: Did you know that the FCC Consumer Advisory
Committee is mainly comprised of phone, cable and broadcast interests.
In the last session, 1/3 of the members are from the industry or their
associations. However, there were also 6 different groups tied to Sam
Simon and Issue Dynamics.This has helped to give the phone companies
control of the consumer interests at the FCC. It is the reason phone
bills are unreadable, or competitors are being put out of business or
sold off.
March 8th, 2005, the FCC announced the new members of this Committtee.
It
includes:
* Alliance for Public Technology, Daniel Phythyon: is Senior Vice
President, Law and Policy at the United States Telecom
Association ("USTA").
APT is funded by Verizon and BellSouth and SBC APT is run by
Sam
Simon's Issue Dynamics. Other members, still on the Committee,
also
have ties to Sam Simon and Issue Dynamics.
* National Association of Broadcasters, Sprint Corporation,
Time Warner,
T-Mobile, Verizon, Nextel Communications, Inc., Cellular
Telecommunications
and Internet Association, and Consumer Electronics
Association,
2) Raising Phone Rates: In 2000, the phone company coalition, known as
the "CALLs Coalition", got over 40 consumer groups who agreed to raise
the FCC Line Charge -- on every local phone bill in America --- from a
cap of $3.50 to $6.50. Issue Dynamics helped to run a campaign to make
consumer groups believe this increase was important and good for their
constituents, claiming it would lower long phone rates. --- It didn't
work for most Americans. Interestingly, almost all of the groups also
got grants from the phone companies.
* "Verizon has worked closely with the National Consumers League
(NCL) to
create and update consumer web pages explaining common
telecommunications
charges." Sam Simon is the current Chairman of the National
Consumer League.
The NCL is on the FCC Consumer Advisory Committee.
* Other groups backing this were NAACP, (an Issue Dynamics client
and on the
APT board) the National Hispanic Council on Aging and American
Association
of People with Disabilities, both on the APT board. All three
got grants and
donations from the Bell companies.
The FCC, in 2005, is currently proposing to raise this charge to
$10.00 --- and guess who they will listen to?
3) Wi-Fi and Municipalities -- Recently, Wi-Fi Network News and others
have outlined how Issue Dynamics, APT and the New Millennium Research
Council (a project of Issue Dynamics) have been issuing reports
bashing municipalities ability to offer broadband and Wi-Fi Internet
services. This data is being using in multiple states throughout the
US to make state legislatures vote against competition. Go to the site
to read more.
4) Harm to Competition and Broadband --- Questionable or co-opted
consumer groups have helped to give exclusive rights for broadband
networks to the phone companies -- SBC and Verizon. For example,
American's For a Digital Divide in 2001, with APT, were supporters of
the Bell broadband proposals that essentially harmed competitors. The
group included:
* World Institute on Disability, (Verizon's Foundation is a member
and Simon
is on the board), American Association of People With
Disabilities, (got
"major donations from both Verizon and the Verizon Foundation,
and put a
Verizon VP on its own board") and the National Association of
the Deaf, a
Sam Simon/Issue Dynamics' client.
5) TRAC and APT, with the help of fake and co-opted groups and bad
research, helped the phone companies enter the long distance markets,
as well as harm competitors.
* TRAC and APT helped Verizon and SBC enter the long distance
market, which
helped to put AT&T and MCI up for sale -- they couldn't compete.
Sam Simon
is founder of TRAC, APT is run by Issue Dynamics. TRAC, a
nonprofit, has
been running at a suspicious loss for years.
* Issue Dynamics got the Gray Panthers to go after MCI in a full
page
advertisement and staged fake rallies. They also enlisted the
United Church
of Christ for other attacks. APT and the United Church of Christ
work
together on projects including the "Everett C. Parker Ethics In
Telecommunications Lectures" (stop laughing.)
6) VOIP and Universal Service Fund (USF) --- APT has helped to create
the "Keep USF FAIR Coalition", with full page adds in USA Today, in
February 2005. In 2004, APT created the VOIP Coalition (Voice over the
Internet).
Both are filled with a mixture of the same players and their positions
are related to the phone companies' needs. For example, instead of
demanding an investigation into the problem-ridden Universal Service
Fund, this group wants what's fair for the phone companies ---
increase the USF, but leave it alone.
* Groups signed onto these campaigns include: APT, American
Association of
People with Disabilities, National Hispanic Council on Aging,
Telecommunications for the Deaf, TRAC, and World Institute on
Disability.
The list goes on and on. --- In some cases, these groups are merely
fronts for the phone companies interests. In other cases, we believe
they've been duped, co-opting authentic consumer groups for the phone
companies'
purposes. However, in ALL cases, the outcome has been to not
investigate the phone companies' behavior and sign on to Bell-friendly
activities that ended up with higher phone rates, a national lack of
fiber-based broadband, and harm to competition, as well as new threats
to the Wi-Fi rollout, municipalities offering services, or new
technologies, such as VOIP.
Let us be clear --- To date we have found no illegal acts. Also, many
of these groups have done great activities for the public interest.
And, we have no problem with non-profits taking money from a large
corporation to fund a public interest activity. However, when these
same groups vote and use their name to promote the activities of the
large corporation, especially when they do not fully disclose the
money received or fail to first consider the needs of their own
constituency, then the country should be outraged and these activities
investigated. While many groups will counter that the phone companies
only represent a percentage of their income, it is now clear that it
represents 100% of their favoritism on telecommunications and
broadband issues. Should they have nonprofit status?
Are they doing illegal-unethical acts?
TAKE ACTION:
A) Go to http://www.newnetworks.com/skunkworks101.html and learn more
--
Don't take our word for it. We've put links to articles and documents
by others, including TRAC's IRS financials, ties between groups, etc.
TAKE ACTION: http://www.newnetworks.com/takethefccback.html
B) Join us in our Complaint to Congress to investigate the FCC
Consumer Advisory Committee's board members. Read the government's
report questioning the FCC's Committee process. --- The new Committee,
announced March 8th, 2005 is still filled with phone companies and
astro-turfers.
C) Complain about nonprofit status and co-mingling of funds for
questionable
groups: Why are fake groups, research firms, etc. getting a free ride
as 501c3, nonprofit groups? Billions of dollars are at stake. Read the
IRS information about restrictions on lobbying.
D) Call for investigations of this problem --- This same scam is
happening in other industries as well, from the fake environmental
groups set up by the oil companies, to the astroturf groups designed
to torpedo health care reform. Read what others have been writing on
this.
Bruce Kushnick, Teletruth, bruce@teletruth.org Tom Allibone,
Teletruth, tom@teletruth.org
PS: Teletruth was a member of the FCC Consumer Advisory Committee in
2003-2004. We were not invited back in 2005.
Wednesday, March 09, 2005
Bloggers and journalist
I fail to see why journalists are in an uproar about bloggers being
marked as distinct from journalists. Clearly bloggers are not held to
the same standards and to include them in your ranks dilutes the
*ahem* reputation that journalists have. In many cases, companies and
politicians share information off the record with journalists - and
that relationship is maintained because journalists know they'll lose
access if they break confidence. Bloggers just don't give a shit and
will "print" anything they want, rarely holding back sensitive information.
I like having bloggers - it makes life interesting. Journalists,
however, seem to have their priorities mixed up by willingly
associating themselves with bloggers and ultimately hurting their own profession.
What makes bloggers interesting is that they'll print what journalists
won't - because they don't have editors telling them they're crossing
a line!
Dan Gilmor has built up 25 years of trust with his sources and
probably has a reasonable understanding of what is publishable and
what is not - but he's no longer a journalist in the traditional
definition - maybe just a trusted blogger. Apple would seek discovery
of his sources if he were to publish the same information as Jason
Ogrady (powerpage) but he would never publish this information! He
wouldn't get into the same fix! How can he be in such an uproar when
what they did clearly supported the violation of trade secrets?
I'm 25 and have been following some of these sites since their
inception and I am capable of recognizing the difference between
journalism and whatever it is that bloggers post.
disclosure: I did once work for Apple, but am no apologist for them.
Bradley Roberts
marked as distinct from journalists. Clearly bloggers are not held to
the same standards and to include them in your ranks dilutes the
*ahem* reputation that journalists have. In many cases, companies and
politicians share information off the record with journalists - and
that relationship is maintained because journalists know they'll lose
access if they break confidence. Bloggers just don't give a shit and
will "print" anything they want, rarely holding back sensitive information.
I like having bloggers - it makes life interesting. Journalists,
however, seem to have their priorities mixed up by willingly
associating themselves with bloggers and ultimately hurting their own profession.
What makes bloggers interesting is that they'll print what journalists
won't - because they don't have editors telling them they're crossing
a line!
Dan Gilmor has built up 25 years of trust with his sources and
probably has a reasonable understanding of what is publishable and
what is not - but he's no longer a journalist in the traditional
definition - maybe just a trusted blogger. Apple would seek discovery
of his sources if he were to publish the same information as Jason
Ogrady (powerpage) but he would never publish this information! He
wouldn't get into the same fix! How can he be in such an uproar when
what they did clearly supported the violation of trade secrets?
I'm 25 and have been following some of these sites since their
inception and I am capable of recognizing the difference between
journalism and whatever it is that bloggers post.
disclosure: I did once work for Apple, but am no apologist for them.
Bradley Roberts
On Bloggers' side and against them
Personally I think a bit too much attention is being paid to blogging nowadays, but I suppose I will rise to bloggers'
defense anyway.
Some bloggers will act as responsibly as journalists in terms of protecting confidences; some will not. Some journalists, even columnists for the Washington Post, have divulged the identities of their confidential sources. Some journalists have lied. Some journalists have plagarized. So have some bloggers. Others have acted honorably.
Whether you like it or not, there is no immutably crisp line dividing the two groups of people from a practical standpoint, and there must not be one from a legal standpoint.
I've worked for a number news organizations including some of the largest around. I believe you're mistaken to think that if Dan Gillmor's old newspaper the SJMN received a verifiable tip about a forthcoming Apple product -- say a radical new iVideo handheld device -- they would somehow refuse to print it. What silliness! (The situation may be different now -- Dan can speak for himself -- because he has a new job and a new role.)
Second, I believe you are mistaken to believe Apple would sue the SJMN; it is protected by the California Constitution while Powerpage is probably not. That discrepancy is the point of my column.
Good blogging is good journalism. Bad blogging is spending all day writing about your cats.
Declan McCullagh
defense anyway.
Some bloggers will act as responsibly as journalists in terms of protecting confidences; some will not. Some journalists, even columnists for the Washington Post, have divulged the identities of their confidential sources. Some journalists have lied. Some journalists have plagarized. So have some bloggers. Others have acted honorably.
Whether you like it or not, there is no immutably crisp line dividing the two groups of people from a practical standpoint, and there must not be one from a legal standpoint.
I've worked for a number news organizations including some of the largest around. I believe you're mistaken to think that if Dan Gillmor's old newspaper the SJMN received a verifiable tip about a forthcoming Apple product -- say a radical new iVideo handheld device -- they would somehow refuse to print it. What silliness! (The situation may be different now -- Dan can speak for himself -- because he has a new job and a new role.)
Second, I believe you are mistaken to believe Apple would sue the SJMN; it is protected by the California Constitution while Powerpage is probably not. That discrepancy is the point of my column.
Good blogging is good journalism. Bad blogging is spending all day writing about your cats.
Declan McCullagh
The Power of H.323
The brilliance of H.323 stems from the following characteristics:
Centralized and Distributed Control
H.323 pushes call control functionality to the endpoint, while still providing the service provider or enterprise with the option to control every aspect of a call. In the traditional circuit-switched network, centralized switches perform all call control functionality. With H.323, part or all of that functionality may be pushed to the edge. In some cases, such as a carrier backbone that is transiting voice or video traffic across the globe, it makes sense for H.323 endpoints to talk directly to each other without the encumbrance of centralized servers. However, there are also cases where such servers are necessary or highly desirable, such as when a service provider wants to carefully monitor telephone usage, provide certain mid-call services, perform lawful interception, or perform screening of telephone numbers (i.e., hiding the identity of a calling party). There are a number of reasons for desiring both modes of operation and H.323 provides the flexibility of centralized and decentralized control.
Focus
H.323 was designed with one clear objective: to provide users with voice, video, and data conferencing capabilities over a packet-switched network. The continued development of H.323 has stayed focused on this objective and, as a result, H.323 is the leader in this space. H.323 does not try to do more than it should and does not try to pretend to be something that it is not. The primary objective of any service provider or enterprise should be to find a way to reduce costs while enriching the users' experience. H.323, with the convergence of voice, video, and data conferencing, do precisely that.
Extensibility
The designers of H.323 knew that communications requirements differ from place to place, user to user, or company to company. Not only that, but it was well understood that communication requirements change with time. Given these facts, H.323 designers defined H.323 in such a way that equipment manufacturers can insert their own additions to the protocol and that the ITU-T or other standards bodies may define extensions to H.323 that will allow devices to acquire new kinds of features or capabilities, yet still remain fully backward-compatible with other systems and versions of H.323.
Integration with Internet Standards
H.323 fully embraces the Internet by integrating with existing Internet technologies, such as RTP/RTCP, URLs, and DNS. In fact, H.323 was the first standards-based protocol to adopt RTP/RTCP for multimedia transmission. H.323 allows users to place phone calls to other users by clicking on a URLs. H.323 endpoints may also perform DNS queries, much as a web browser would perform a DNS query to find a web site, in order to locate a user or services.
Because of its solid foundation and technical capabilities, H.323 has been highly successful. In fact, H.323 now carries billions of minutes of voice, video, and data conferencing traffic over IP networks every month. H.323 is the clear leader for voice, video, and data convergence.
Centralized and Distributed Control
H.323 pushes call control functionality to the endpoint, while still providing the service provider or enterprise with the option to control every aspect of a call. In the traditional circuit-switched network, centralized switches perform all call control functionality. With H.323, part or all of that functionality may be pushed to the edge. In some cases, such as a carrier backbone that is transiting voice or video traffic across the globe, it makes sense for H.323 endpoints to talk directly to each other without the encumbrance of centralized servers. However, there are also cases where such servers are necessary or highly desirable, such as when a service provider wants to carefully monitor telephone usage, provide certain mid-call services, perform lawful interception, or perform screening of telephone numbers (i.e., hiding the identity of a calling party). There are a number of reasons for desiring both modes of operation and H.323 provides the flexibility of centralized and decentralized control.
Focus
H.323 was designed with one clear objective: to provide users with voice, video, and data conferencing capabilities over a packet-switched network. The continued development of H.323 has stayed focused on this objective and, as a result, H.323 is the leader in this space. H.323 does not try to do more than it should and does not try to pretend to be something that it is not. The primary objective of any service provider or enterprise should be to find a way to reduce costs while enriching the users' experience. H.323, with the convergence of voice, video, and data conferencing, do precisely that.
Extensibility
The designers of H.323 knew that communications requirements differ from place to place, user to user, or company to company. Not only that, but it was well understood that communication requirements change with time. Given these facts, H.323 designers defined H.323 in such a way that equipment manufacturers can insert their own additions to the protocol and that the ITU-T or other standards bodies may define extensions to H.323 that will allow devices to acquire new kinds of features or capabilities, yet still remain fully backward-compatible with other systems and versions of H.323.
Integration with Internet Standards
H.323 fully embraces the Internet by integrating with existing Internet technologies, such as RTP/RTCP, URLs, and DNS. In fact, H.323 was the first standards-based protocol to adopt RTP/RTCP for multimedia transmission. H.323 allows users to place phone calls to other users by clicking on a URLs. H.323 endpoints may also perform DNS queries, much as a web browser would perform a DNS query to find a web site, in order to locate a user or services.
Because of its solid foundation and technical capabilities, H.323 has been highly successful. In fact, H.323 now carries billions of minutes of voice, video, and data conferencing traffic over IP networks every month. H.323 is the clear leader for voice, video, and data convergence.
Why H.323?
What is ITU-T Recommendation H.323? Why have the worlds largest carriers deployed and continue to deploy H.323? H.323 is the first and remains the most powerful international multimedia communications protocol standard, bringing the convergence of voice, video, and data. Built for the packet-based network, H.323 has found a strong home in IP networks, making it the leader in VoIP.
As with other carrier-grade communication protocols, H.323 is a standard published by the International Telecommunications Union. It was approved by the world governments as the international standard for voice, video, and data conferencing, defining how devices such as computers, telephones, mobile phones, PDAs, wireless phones, video conferencing systems, etc., communicate to bring a whole new experience to the user.
H.323 borrows from both the traditional PSTN protocols and the Internet-related standards. By leveraging from both circuit-switched and packet-switched protocol standards, H.323 is able to smoothly integrate with the PSTN, while at the same time send multimedia communications over such mediums as the Internet.
H.323 originated in the mid-'90s as a logical extension of the circuit-switched multimedia conferencing work being done within the ITU-T. Because of this heritage, H.323 interoperates well with a very large installed base of video conferencing equipment. However, H.323 introduced much more capability than was introduced by previous protocols. It brought with it the ability to integrate with the Internet and the World Wide Web (WWW), as well as interface with the PSTN, to provide a range of applications from wholesale transit of voice, pre-paid calling card services, residential voice/video services, enterprise voice/video services, and much more. With H.323, users at remote locations are able to hold a video call and edit a document together-in real-time over the Internet-using their personal computers. Not only that, but H.323 allows the users to customize their phones or phone services, locate users, transfer a call, or perform any number of other tasks by using an HTTP interface between the H.323 client and a server on the network. H.323 fully embraces the power of the Internet.
From the outset, designers of H.323 wanted to create a protocol that would serve well as the Next Generation Network protocol. H.323 significantly lowers the cost of communications and facilitates the rapid creation of many new kinds of services that were never before possible. In addition, H.323 enables endpoints to perform tasks that were previously only possible for centralized servers to perform. H.323 breaks away from the "old technology" model and introduces an intelligent endpoint capable of initiating and accepting calls without dependency on centralized network elements. However, recognizing the business requirements for centralized control in the service provider and enterprise markets, H.323 also allows for centralized control over the endpoint when desired. The level or extent to which a carrier or enterprise wishes to exert control is entirely up to them.
As with other carrier-grade communication protocols, H.323 is a standard published by the International Telecommunications Union. It was approved by the world governments as the international standard for voice, video, and data conferencing, defining how devices such as computers, telephones, mobile phones, PDAs, wireless phones, video conferencing systems, etc., communicate to bring a whole new experience to the user.
H.323 borrows from both the traditional PSTN protocols and the Internet-related standards. By leveraging from both circuit-switched and packet-switched protocol standards, H.323 is able to smoothly integrate with the PSTN, while at the same time send multimedia communications over such mediums as the Internet.
H.323 originated in the mid-'90s as a logical extension of the circuit-switched multimedia conferencing work being done within the ITU-T. Because of this heritage, H.323 interoperates well with a very large installed base of video conferencing equipment. However, H.323 introduced much more capability than was introduced by previous protocols. It brought with it the ability to integrate with the Internet and the World Wide Web (WWW), as well as interface with the PSTN, to provide a range of applications from wholesale transit of voice, pre-paid calling card services, residential voice/video services, enterprise voice/video services, and much more. With H.323, users at remote locations are able to hold a video call and edit a document together-in real-time over the Internet-using their personal computers. Not only that, but H.323 allows the users to customize their phones or phone services, locate users, transfer a call, or perform any number of other tasks by using an HTTP interface between the H.323 client and a server on the network. H.323 fully embraces the power of the Internet.
From the outset, designers of H.323 wanted to create a protocol that would serve well as the Next Generation Network protocol. H.323 significantly lowers the cost of communications and facilitates the rapid creation of many new kinds of services that were never before possible. In addition, H.323 enables endpoints to perform tasks that were previously only possible for centralized servers to perform. H.323 breaks away from the "old technology" model and introduces an intelligent endpoint capable of initiating and accepting calls without dependency on centralized network elements. However, recognizing the business requirements for centralized control in the service provider and enterprise markets, H.323 also allows for centralized control over the endpoint when desired. The level or extent to which a carrier or enterprise wishes to exert control is entirely up to them.
Tuesday, March 08, 2005
What Do You Want the Internet To Be?
During the Internet boom of the late 1990s, Nortel Networks ran an advertising campaign that featured as its slogan, "what do you want the Internet to be?". The implications were obvious - the Internet was a technology of unlimited possibility that could be whatever we wanted it to be.
More than five years later, Nortel's vision is becoming reality. The Internet has become so essential to the every day lives of millions of people - a pillar of communication, information, entertainment, education, and commerce - that at times it seems as if the Internet really is anything we want it to be.
Notwithstanding the Internet's remarkable potential, there are dark clouds on the horizon. There are some who see a very differing Internet. Theirs is an Internet with ubiquitous surveillance featuring real-time capabilities to monitor online activities. It is an Internet that views third party applications such as Vonage's Voice-over-IP service as parasitic. It is an Internet in which virtually all content should come at a price, even when that content has been made freely available. It is an Internet that would seek to cut off subscriber access based on mere allegations of wrongdoing, without due process or oversight from a judge or jury.
This disturbing vision of the Internet is not fantasy. It is based on real policy proposals being considered by the Canadian government today.
Leading the way is the federal government's "lawful access" initiative. While the term lawful access sounds innocuous, the program, which dates back to 2002, represents law enforcement's desire to re-make Canada's networks to allow for lawful interception of private communications.
If lawful access becomes reality, Canada's telecommunications service providers (TSPs) will be required to refit their networks to allow for real-time interception of communications, to have the capability of simultaneously intercepting multiple transmissions, and to provide detailed subscriber information to law enforcement authorities without a court order within 72 hours.
Moreover, Canada's TSPs will be subject to inspections and required to provide the government with reports on the technical capabilities of their networks. All of these activities will be shrouded in secrecy with TSPs facing fines of up to $500,000 or sentences of up to five years in jail for failing to keep the data collection confidential.
All of these changes come at an enormous cost - both financially (hundreds of millions of dollars in new technology) and to our personal privacy. While some changes may be needed for security purposes, the government has yet to make the case for why the current set of powers, which include cybercrime and wiretapping provisions, are insufficient. Moreover, there has been no evidence provided that this approach is the least privacy invasive alternative.
Refitting the network is not limited to government initiatives. In recent weeks it has become apparent that the network providers themselves may seek to interfere with the free flow of data. For example, Vonage (the leading independent Voice-over-IP provider) recently filed a complaint with the Federal Communications Commission in the U.S. alleging that an unnamed Internet service provider was blocking its service. Last week, the ISP agreed to stop and to pay a fine to the FCC.
In a less publicized incident, the Communications Commission of Kenya last week ordered the state-owned Telkom Kenya to restore service to Sema VoIP, another Voice-over-IP provider which is backed by Canadian-based BMT North America. The Commission warned Telkom Kenya against taking similar action in the future.
The issue raised by these cases is not new. Observers have long feared that ISPs would succumb to economic self-interest, engaging in "packet preferencing" by blocking or slowing data coming from competing sites or services. While ISPs are quick to argue that they want merely to serve as intermediaries without regard for what traverses their networks, as they offer competing Internet phone services, music download services, and other value-added content, there will be a clear temptation to create a home network advantage.
In fact, at the CRTC hearings into VoIP last fall, the parent company of at least one major ISP gave every indication that it did not view third party services favourably. Quebecor, which owns Videotron, told the Commission that services such as Vonage contributed nothing to the development of facilities-based competition and that "the service provider's VoIP-based service is totally parasitic on the local access facilities of other carriers."
As the leading Canadian ISPs roll out their own VoIP services, many may look at competing services in the same way and seek to limit the use of their network. Stopping such interference requires a strong CRTC, yet with Industry Minister David Emerson's planned review of Canada's telecommunications law, some industry experts fear that Canada is heading in the opposite direction.
The Minister of Industry, together with Liza Frulla, his Canadian Heritage counterpart, are also reportedly about to finalize new rules that may reshape the availability of Internet content to educational institutions. Acting on the recommendation of a parliamentary committee that was chaired by Toronto MP Sarmite Bulte, the government may soon unveil a new "extended license" that would require schools to pay millions of dollars for content that is currently freely available on the Internet.
While the committee recommendation excluded payment for content that is publicly available, it adopted the narrowest possible definition of publicly available, limiting it to only those works that are not technologically or password protected and which contain an explicit notice that the material can be used without prior payment or permission.
Moreover, those same ministers are also contemplating a new system that would allow content owners to file a complaint with an ISP if one of their subscribers has allegedly posted infringing content. Canada's rules for child pornography still require a court order before content is removed, yet if the Canadian Recording Industry Association and other well-funded interests gets their way, the ISP will respond to a mere allegation of copyright infringement by "kicking the subscriber off the system."
With Canada conceivably ready to adopt rules that make it far easier to remove an allegedly infringing song than to remove dangerous child pornography from a new fee-based, surveillance-ready, packet preferenced Internet, it is difficult to overstate how out of touch our Internet policy process has become. Is this really what we want our Internet to be?
More than five years later, Nortel's vision is becoming reality. The Internet has become so essential to the every day lives of millions of people - a pillar of communication, information, entertainment, education, and commerce - that at times it seems as if the Internet really is anything we want it to be.
Notwithstanding the Internet's remarkable potential, there are dark clouds on the horizon. There are some who see a very differing Internet. Theirs is an Internet with ubiquitous surveillance featuring real-time capabilities to monitor online activities. It is an Internet that views third party applications such as Vonage's Voice-over-IP service as parasitic. It is an Internet in which virtually all content should come at a price, even when that content has been made freely available. It is an Internet that would seek to cut off subscriber access based on mere allegations of wrongdoing, without due process or oversight from a judge or jury.
This disturbing vision of the Internet is not fantasy. It is based on real policy proposals being considered by the Canadian government today.
Leading the way is the federal government's "lawful access" initiative. While the term lawful access sounds innocuous, the program, which dates back to 2002, represents law enforcement's desire to re-make Canada's networks to allow for lawful interception of private communications.
If lawful access becomes reality, Canada's telecommunications service providers (TSPs) will be required to refit their networks to allow for real-time interception of communications, to have the capability of simultaneously intercepting multiple transmissions, and to provide detailed subscriber information to law enforcement authorities without a court order within 72 hours.
Moreover, Canada's TSPs will be subject to inspections and required to provide the government with reports on the technical capabilities of their networks. All of these activities will be shrouded in secrecy with TSPs facing fines of up to $500,000 or sentences of up to five years in jail for failing to keep the data collection confidential.
All of these changes come at an enormous cost - both financially (hundreds of millions of dollars in new technology) and to our personal privacy. While some changes may be needed for security purposes, the government has yet to make the case for why the current set of powers, which include cybercrime and wiretapping provisions, are insufficient. Moreover, there has been no evidence provided that this approach is the least privacy invasive alternative.
Refitting the network is not limited to government initiatives. In recent weeks it has become apparent that the network providers themselves may seek to interfere with the free flow of data. For example, Vonage (the leading independent Voice-over-IP provider) recently filed a complaint with the Federal Communications Commission in the U.S. alleging that an unnamed Internet service provider was blocking its service. Last week, the ISP agreed to stop and to pay a fine to the FCC.
In a less publicized incident, the Communications Commission of Kenya last week ordered the state-owned Telkom Kenya to restore service to Sema VoIP, another Voice-over-IP provider which is backed by Canadian-based BMT North America. The Commission warned Telkom Kenya against taking similar action in the future.
The issue raised by these cases is not new. Observers have long feared that ISPs would succumb to economic self-interest, engaging in "packet preferencing" by blocking or slowing data coming from competing sites or services. While ISPs are quick to argue that they want merely to serve as intermediaries without regard for what traverses their networks, as they offer competing Internet phone services, music download services, and other value-added content, there will be a clear temptation to create a home network advantage.
In fact, at the CRTC hearings into VoIP last fall, the parent company of at least one major ISP gave every indication that it did not view third party services favourably. Quebecor, which owns Videotron, told the Commission that services such as Vonage contributed nothing to the development of facilities-based competition and that "the service provider's VoIP-based service is totally parasitic on the local access facilities of other carriers."
As the leading Canadian ISPs roll out their own VoIP services, many may look at competing services in the same way and seek to limit the use of their network. Stopping such interference requires a strong CRTC, yet with Industry Minister David Emerson's planned review of Canada's telecommunications law, some industry experts fear that Canada is heading in the opposite direction.
The Minister of Industry, together with Liza Frulla, his Canadian Heritage counterpart, are also reportedly about to finalize new rules that may reshape the availability of Internet content to educational institutions. Acting on the recommendation of a parliamentary committee that was chaired by Toronto MP Sarmite Bulte, the government may soon unveil a new "extended license" that would require schools to pay millions of dollars for content that is currently freely available on the Internet.
While the committee recommendation excluded payment for content that is publicly available, it adopted the narrowest possible definition of publicly available, limiting it to only those works that are not technologically or password protected and which contain an explicit notice that the material can be used without prior payment or permission.
Moreover, those same ministers are also contemplating a new system that would allow content owners to file a complaint with an ISP if one of their subscribers has allegedly posted infringing content. Canada's rules for child pornography still require a court order before content is removed, yet if the Canadian Recording Industry Association and other well-funded interests gets their way, the ISP will respond to a mere allegation of copyright infringement by "kicking the subscriber off the system."
With Canada conceivably ready to adopt rules that make it far easier to remove an allegedly infringing song than to remove dangerous child pornography from a new fee-based, surveillance-ready, packet preferenced Internet, it is difficult to overstate how out of touch our Internet policy process has become. Is this really what we want our Internet to be?
Sunday, March 06, 2005
Lying
If you ask 100 people if it is right to revere a man because he is an an aristocrat or a member of the royal family they will answer it is plain silly, but 90% of them will go on bowing their heads and breathing heavily in the presence of such a person.
Seeing the irrationality of a belief does not mean that people can-or will ever try to-get rid of it.
Religion may be a bunch of fairy tales but fairy tales too are basic necessities.
Religion may be bunk but it makes many people more understanding, wiser, more tolerant, more broad minded and happier than they would be without it.(or it should)
It gives meaning to many lives and as we are reluctant to accept the idea that life has no special meaning, we should be grateful for the gift.
There are the mad bigots of the Ayatollah type, there are the hypocrites who make a good living as workers in the church industry and there are of course, the honest believers for whom religion is the true meaning of life.
But it is not the true believers who keep the churches powerful, it is the vast army of non-believers who help to preserve the churches' strength.
Religions may be true or untrue, but the need for religious belief is certainly real for many people.
Lies too can be a need. For many reasons, the most important being not to acknowledge the truth.
Seeing the irrationality of a belief does not mean that people can-or will ever try to-get rid of it.
Religion may be a bunch of fairy tales but fairy tales too are basic necessities.
Religion may be bunk but it makes many people more understanding, wiser, more tolerant, more broad minded and happier than they would be without it.(or it should)
It gives meaning to many lives and as we are reluctant to accept the idea that life has no special meaning, we should be grateful for the gift.
There are the mad bigots of the Ayatollah type, there are the hypocrites who make a good living as workers in the church industry and there are of course, the honest believers for whom religion is the true meaning of life.
But it is not the true believers who keep the churches powerful, it is the vast army of non-believers who help to preserve the churches' strength.
Religions may be true or untrue, but the need for religious belief is certainly real for many people.
Lies too can be a need. For many reasons, the most important being not to acknowledge the truth.
Thursday, March 03, 2005
To see if something is possible is trying to imagine it in our mind's eye.
Most people live with a bag over their head.
They treat sight as a convenient method of avoiding bumping into things or watching television.
Another symptom of bagged head is fixed view.
Most people's lives are like sitting facing forwards on a train where everything rushes past in a blur, instead of sitting with their back to the engine in visual comfort to let the landscape scroll by.
Looking is giving direction to one's sight.
Most of us, faced with a scene, look at it rather than look into it.
What you see and what you notice aren't the same thing.
They treat sight as a convenient method of avoiding bumping into things or watching television.
Another symptom of bagged head is fixed view.
Most people's lives are like sitting facing forwards on a train where everything rushes past in a blur, instead of sitting with their back to the engine in visual comfort to let the landscape scroll by.
Looking is giving direction to one's sight.
Most of us, faced with a scene, look at it rather than look into it.
What you see and what you notice aren't the same thing.
Tuesday, March 01, 2005
The "visual society"
Our society will pass to history under many definitions, let's hope not "the third world war's".
But the one that in my opinion most reflects it, is the definition "visual society".
We are falling back to a kind of primitive stage.
History teaches us that in the past when a nation reached great progress and big goals, then it began the downhill phase.
We saw it in the Middle East, in Egypt, in Greece and in the Roman Empire.
With great luxury availability there comes a kind of relaxation, laziness, a willingness to live more on the past than on the future.
And this is exactly what our Old world is going through.
A degeneration in culture, in interest, a passivity in working.
We want always to work less and less and to earn more and more.
That is what we are used to.
We are more prone to visualize than to think.
Because it is easier, because it is more immediate, because we are lazy.
And also because we have been used to.
To have it the easy way. Whatever it can be.
The easiest it is the easiest it sells.
The more idiotic it is the more customers you find.
The more customers you can find, the more revenue you make.
A picture is worth one thousand words, that anyway most people wouldn't read.
A picture is immediate, a picture is something everybody can understand.
A picture reaches the mass while many words don't.
patrizia@worldonip.com
http://woip.blogspot.com
http://www.worldonip.com
http://www.easymediabroadcast.com
But the one that in my opinion most reflects it, is the definition "visual society".
We are falling back to a kind of primitive stage.
History teaches us that in the past when a nation reached great progress and big goals, then it began the downhill phase.
We saw it in the Middle East, in Egypt, in Greece and in the Roman Empire.
With great luxury availability there comes a kind of relaxation, laziness, a willingness to live more on the past than on the future.
And this is exactly what our Old world is going through.
A degeneration in culture, in interest, a passivity in working.
We want always to work less and less and to earn more and more.
That is what we are used to.
We are more prone to visualize than to think.
Because it is easier, because it is more immediate, because we are lazy.
And also because we have been used to.
To have it the easy way. Whatever it can be.
The easiest it is the easiest it sells.
The more idiotic it is the more customers you find.
The more customers you can find, the more revenue you make.
A picture is worth one thousand words, that anyway most people wouldn't read.
A picture is immediate, a picture is something everybody can understand.
A picture reaches the mass while many words don't.
patrizia@worldonip.com
http://woip.blogspot.com
http://www.worldonip.com
http://www.easymediabroadcast.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Stumble It!