Surely as they are not going to be running their own email servers any more and are moving the email accounts to a BETA service then we should have an appropriate reduction in our monthly costs.
Cant see that happening though.
11 posts • joined 4 Jan 2008
Looking at the IWF's site I cannot see a list or partial list of blocked URL's. I can understand this as it could be used as a list for ppl to hunt down offensive material.
What I dont know though is what of my URL requests are affected by this or any other organisation my ISP decides to align with. Surely if my request for data is interrupted by IWF then I could get a response saying this is the case. If I just get a 404, how can I reliably and quick assertain that the problem is IWF/ISP rather than the server I am requesting from.
Also how can I know what organisations my ISP subscribe to in this manner?
So many questions, so few answers (virgin media tech support are not forthcoming). Do I have a right to any of this information?
Anyone who uses MSN will know that live realtime censorship has been in place for years. Although rather than replacing the undesired word with *** the whole message returns with a "unable to be sent" message. Coupled with the fact that the list of blocked words or terms changes silently from time to time, you may occasionally find yourself being unable to do things like share youtube links or talk about being a sysadmin.
To me the problem here is that if I own a site the ISP can make any subdomains under it show whatever they want. At the moment it seems to be ads, but surely they could put a rival service there. Maybe if someone made cheapmp3s.itunes.com point to a different store and started marketing that address then there would be enough fuss created which would hopefully ensure that when someone owns a domainname people cannot legally redirect subdomains for any reason (mistyped or otherwise)
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019