Re: "Default" Internet Service (was: Re: Points on your Internet driver's license)

[John Curran <jcurran () istaff org>]

At 6:31 AM -0400 6/13/04, Sean Donelan wrote:
> Network level controls aren't as effective as
> some people hope at stopping many things.  ISPs should stop porn, ISPs
> should stop music sharing, ISPs should stop viruses, ISPs should
> stop <insert here>.  Yet somehow users manage to find a way around
> all of them.

In a perfect world, ISPs shouldn't have to worry about content.  There
is no way to "know" whether the user wants a particular message and
methods at guessing are always imperfect.   Despite this, a lot of users
would like their ISP to try to do their best to filter spam and viruses out
of their mail stream, etc.   It really should be an local issue but users ask,
so the service appears.

However, distinguish content from access.   Typical users, particularly
in broadband residential connections, have no desire to have anyone
remotely access their machine.  The same is true with most small
business customers.  Upon arrival of their first Internet connection,
the systems do not magically recognize that end-to-end now could
be any endpoint in the Internet and install appropriate filters.   Why
doesn't it make sense to change the default model so that such are
in place under the user demonstrates some understanding of the
situation by asking them to be removed?

To add one more analogy to the mix, we blindly install on-ramps to
the freeway to anyone who asks and certainly a few folks know
what is in store once connected.  However, the vast majority of
ramps are connected to suburban driveways, skate board parks,
and middle school playgrounds.  It's amazing that we all act
surprised when innocents get run over...

/John