Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Pollard; Extremely Extreme Extremist; Diana in Wisconsin; fruser1; gaijin
this is a case of putting all your eggs in one basket and having blinders on. He should have saved up and gotten a website and used Paypal and/or Stripe.

Everyone on here ranting about how he should start his own site is ignoring the fact that either the site that HOSTS "your own" web site (or any of the larger digital pipes farther up the chain) can cut you off, slow you down or strangle your traffic – without notice. Internet access and reach don't come directly from God to your computer without anything in between.

This is why eventually the government will have to set down some basic regulations for "common carrier" status on sites that grow so large as FB.

The internet operates something like a municipal water system. "Your own" web site is like the spigots in your house; but they are connected to a main line from the street to your house, and that main is connected to a larger conduit, and that conduit is connected to an even larger conduit, and that is connected to a purification plant and that is connected to a water source. Many corruptions can break the pipes or the purification plant; other forces upstream can pollute or dam up the water source.

It's the same with internet traffic: there are lots of pipes and joints and places where the volume of flow can break down, or be interfered with, between your site and other users. The bigger and richer the digital giants get, the more control they have over the entire supply line.

102 posted on 10/15/2018 8:09:18 AM PDT by Albion Wilde (Trump hates negative publicity, unless he generates it. -Corey Lewandowski)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]


To: Albion Wilde

But until ISPs and network providers start doing that, the benefit of a paid for website is that you now have an actual contract case to take to court. You’d be able to put them on the defensive to explain to a judge why you don’t meet their “acceptable use” criteria and have a chance to collect damages.

The threat of upstream interference is real, but by definition, a threat would be a future battle and only if the threat is realized.


104 posted on 10/15/2018 8:18:45 AM PDT by fruser1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson