ISPs Blocking Gambling Related sites in the USA

[managra]

don't have comcast. Amandajm, do us all a favor and contact comcast to find out the reason for this odd "outage".

 

[Peaceful1]

I have Comcast, but I haven't had any problem accessing these sites

 

[paul02085]

i have comcast also, no problems.

 

[amandajm]

don't have comcast. Amandajm, do us all a favor and contact comcast to find out the reason for this odd "outage".

I would if I thought it would help any. The poster at G911 had as much reason to pass on such misinformation as the Prof did.

I will not partake in poohpoohing the word of the prof or Mccash on the word of some isp provider employee.

It stands to reason in my book. If the firms are testing a filter, they ain't going to admit it by definition.

 

[Webzcas]

I would if I thought it would help any. The poster at G911 had as much reason to pass on such misinformation as the Prof did.

I will not partake in poohpoohing the word of the prof or Mccash on the word of some isp provider employee.

It stands to reason in my book. If the firms are testing a filter, they ain't going to admit it by definition.

Sure of course they are not going to. However and this is what people tend to forget. Outages do occur and whilst the incident the other week seemingly only took out gaming sites, this was coincidental. It has been confirmed that it was down to a major outage experienced by a Canadian ISP.

The day the US Federal Govt actively starts forcing US ISP's to filter out any sites with gambling related content is a long long way away if at all.

 

[mdmblue]

Yeah, I was blocked...and pissed!

Last week...early in the morning...I attempted to load a casino. No deals. Then I attempted to load another casino...again..no deal.
I have Adelphia. And yes...they ran a test to see if they could block gambling sites. It worked. They blocked Neteller, Firepay and all my casinos for about two hours.
I contacted them and ask what the hell is going on...I am not into censorship what-so-ever. I ruded them out (I was not in a good mood because they did this) and asked them what's next? Selling our keystrokes to the government?
I asked them why they are not spending as much of an effort in moderating forums to catch pedophiles and other lowlifes...no reply to that one.
I told them if they do it again, censor where I can and cannot go online, I would contact my local news station and tell them of the censorship deal and that I would absolutely cancel my account, along with many other people who can't go where they want to go online by being censored.
I have not had a problem since...but I worry they might actually be logging keystrokes, etc. now or in the future. Big freakin' brother. Sheesh.

 

[Westland Bowl]

........
I have not had a problem since...but I worry they might actually be logging keystrokes, etc. now or in the future. Big freakin' brother. Sheesh.

Supposedly, a keylogger has to be installed into your physical computer in order to catch what you type. But Dell has been caught with keyloggers in their new computers at least as far back as mid-2004 without informing the customers of such. It wouldn't surprise me if NSA/Homeland Security requires all computer manufacturers to do this, to install keyloggers in new computers. If I knew how to de-install stuff in my computer, I'd look for it and take it out.

 

[GrandMaster]

That's another urban legend, and it was about a hardware keylogger, not a software keylogger.

 

[Westland Bowl]

Ok, I is de gullible one. Apparently, there are many sites that show keylogger event was a hoax. In Gilda Radner's Roseanne Roseannadanna fashion, "Never mind!"

 

[Peaceful1]

Net neutrality

Maybe all of this isn't so much of a focus on blocking internet gambling... but this issue instead...

Please see the following links:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[scrollock]

i read recently that in a poll, over 50% of americans believe saddam hussein was involved in the twin towers attack. LMFAO

so maybe your goverment/isps are blocking access to certain websites?

anyway i have no sympathy for you yanks, if your going to elect an idiot than you cant complain about the consequences.

 

[Casinomeister]

...anyway i have no sympathy for you yanks, if your going to elect an idiot than you cant complain about the consequences.

Watch it, scrollock. If it wasn't for us yanks, you'd be eating Bratwurst, drinking Bier, and speaking German every day.

Oh, wait a minute - that's what I'm doing.

 

[winbig]

anyway i have no sympathy for you yanks, if your going to elect an idiot than you cant complain about the consequences.

FYI

#1 Not everyone voted for George W
#2 Less than 50% voted for him, but he still won (wtf?)
#3 Don't judge citizens of a country by its leader

 

[Peaceful1]

so maybe your goverment/isps are blocking access to certain websites?

anyway i have no sympathy for you yanks, if your going to elect an idiot than you cant complain about the consequences.

First of all, the vast majority of my posts are strictly relayed information and fact, which does not necessarily reflect my own personal views and opinions.
If I state something that may be "speculation" or my personal opinion, I usually say so within the text.

If you read the links/information thoroughly, it actually states that some Senators and House Reps. are seeking to produce legislation that would MANDATE Net neutrality (ISPs must not configure their services to alter or block access to certain sites, whether it be for profit by charging higher prices to be able to do so, or for any other reason). Therefore, ensuring Americans the freedom to access whatever site they choose, in defense of our freedoms.

Yes, Barton's bill is under controversy because his initial draft of this bill in November 2005 includes provisions stating that ISPs (broadband providers) MAY NOT block internet access to certain sites. However, his final version is much more vague, and simply states that the Federal Communications Commission has the authority to set rules and monitor/publish violations. Stated as such, this bill can now be "loosely interpreted", potentially leaving room for misbehavior/misconduct, lacking strong context for penalties (if an ISP blocks customer access or makes them "pay extra"). Thus, many Americans (MYSELF included) are uncomfortable with this.

Senator Wyden is proposing to counter this House bill with legislation that ensures "access for all"...

According to

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

,

"Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, took aim at Barton's proposal on Monday. "This legislation begins the construction of a multilayered, toll-strewn information superhighway that is out of sync with what has made the Internet work: access for all," said Wyden, who introduced his own bill earlier this month mandating Net neutrality."

My opinion/suggestion relating to this ... Sen. Wyden (because of his stance on protecting our freedoms) ... perhaps he may be one of the "few and far between" who do not support the bill to prohibit online gambling, since many of the bills proposed so far over the years include provisions for ISPs to be able or even required to, block access to particular sites ... since he is now fighting this (a good thing for us). But exactly how he feels about online gambling, or gambling period, I don't know ... But fact states that he IS against blocking sites, and ensuring we can access any sites we choose to, so, you do the math.

It is also to prevent broadband companies (which are not part of any Government Agency) ... from potentially utilizing this as a method to raise rates and fees to their customers to be able to access what they should have been able to do freely in the first place. And groups such as Yahoo, Microsoft, etc. are looking to Congress to provide legislation to ensure this.

 

[paul02085]

First of all, the vast majority of my posts are strictly relayed information and fact, which does not necessarily reflect my own personal views and opinions.
If I state something that may be "speculation" or my personal opinion, I usually say so within the text.

If you read the links/information thoroughly, it actually states that some Senators and House Reps. are seeking to produce legislation that would MANDATE Net neutrality (ISPs must not configure their services to alter or block access to certain sites, whether it be for profit by charging higher prices to be able to do so, or for any other reason). Therefore, ensuring Americans the freedom to access whatever site they choose, in defense of our freedoms.

Yes, Barton's bill is under controversy because his initial draft of this bill in November 2005 includes provisions stating that ISPs (broadband providers) MAY NOT block internet access to certain sites. However, his final version is much more vague, and simply states that the Federal Communications Commission has the authority to set rules and monitor/publish violations. Stated as such, this bill can now be "loosely interpreted", potentially leaving room for misbehavior/misconduct, lacking strong context for penalties (if an ISP blocks customer access or makes them "pay extra"). Thus, many Americans (MYSELF included) are uncomfortable with this.

Senator Wyden is proposing to counter this House bill with legislation that ensures "access for all"...

According to

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

,

"Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, took aim at Barton's proposal on Monday. "This legislation begins the construction of a multilayered, toll-strewn information superhighway that is out of sync with what has made the Internet work: access for all," said Wyden, who introduced his own bill earlier this month mandating Net neutrality."

My opinion/suggestion relating to this ... Sen. Wyden (because of his stance on protecting our freedoms) ... perhaps he may be one of the "few and far between" who do not support the bill to prohibit online gambling, since many of the bills proposed so far over the years include provisions for ISPs to be able or even required to, block access to particular sites ... since he is now fighting this (a good thing for us). But exactly how he feels about online gambling, or gambling period, I don't know ... But fact states that he IS against blocking sites, and ensuring we can access any sites we choose to, so, you do the math.

It is also to prevent broadband companies (which are not part of any Government Agency) ... from potentially utilizing this as a method to raise rates and fees to their customers to be able to access what they should have been able to do freely in the first place. And groups such as Yahoo, Microsoft, etc. are looking to Congress to provide legislation to ensure this.

Thanks for the info Cynthia. And thanks for not being a punk who takes cheap shots at others like some of the loud mouths in here do. Some of you people should keep you traps shut.

 

[jetset]

Cynthia777, don't be discouraged - it takes diverse personalities to make the fora stimulating and I am sure that by now you know how much your contributions are appreciated and valued by many of us here.

 

[Peaceful1]

Thank you, Jetset...I guess I get somewhat defensive (but tactfully so) when it comes to my credibility and clarifying issues that some (and yes, I've learned that at least those types are "few and far between" on the forum), may be quick to misconstrue. And yes, I do appreciate those that have thanked me for providing information that I have knowledge of and access to ... and I am glad that I can be a helpful resource when it comes to these matters.


Here is the link to Sen. Wyden's proposed legislation concerning "Internet Neutrality":

Link Removed (invalid URL)


Sen. Wyden appears to be a strong advocate of having the freedom to access all sites, and by proposing this bill, wants to ensure that ISPs CANNOT block or alter access to websites. I believe there was a posting either in this thread or the thread "Fighting H.R.4777" about how surprising it was that others (besides those affiliated with, or consumers who wager via the Internet), have not expressed opposition to blocking sites, solely for the purpose of defending our freedoms. The site (and other articles relating to this) does highlight that there are several groups in support of Wyden's bill, such as Yahoo, E-Bay, MSN, and Consumer Advocacy Groups.

 

[dominique]

Senator Wyden's state offers lottery tickets, scratchies and Keno online.

He should have an interest n keeping it that way. It is bringing in much of the revenue for his not exactly rich state.

Go Wyden!

And, thank you Cynthia!

 

[Peaceful1]

You're welcome, Dominique

This is interesting to know, as I have always wondered why (and how close) Maryland is/was to doing the same, particularly after the Maryland Lottery website recently added the feature of being able to watch actual Keno draws online through their site...but still not able to buy the tickets online

I guess one should run to the store and buy a ticket for like 50 draws and run home and watch it??!