Sonic.net CEO: We Delete User Logs After Two Weeks. Your ISP Should, Too.
forbes.com
forbes.com
I've been begging them to let me give them money for my home connection.
Their marketing: $39.95/m for speeds up to 20Mbps
Their reality: ~$50/m for ~8Mbps
Now I continue to pay despite this discrepancy. I just wish there was more of an 'under-promise, over-deliver' mindset in their marketing dept.
http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/r26910859-New-Fusion-a...
I'd say sonic offers the best DSL service of any provider. I switched from att to sonic and got much better speeds over the same lines, probably thanks to a better backend setup. This privacy policy is another example of that.
6/1 at another site, so there we use Comcast Business instead.
And... if you live in Sebastopol or, I think, one of a limited number of other trial areas, affordable Gb connectivity!
Aside from just offering better choices, we need Sonic and the like to push the BigCo's to do better. (Speaking as someone trapped in a BigCo oligopoly zone (BOZ?).)
The law enforcement agency will ask for a subpoena that will ask for "all records, logs, files, documents... relating to or describing the subscriber(s) using the IP address $dottedquad at or around $date(s)". The config file that keeps your static IP associated with a MAC address or whatever will certainly be turned over.
I have nothing but admiration for these guys.
They claim the phone service is "free", but you get nailed with various taxes and fees. The taxes are a legal requirement. The fees are entirely up to Sonic, although some have regulatory maximums. And Sonic charges those maximums - something AT&T doesn't!
If they were honest they wouldn't hide things like this, pretending something is free when it clearly isn't.
Even AT&T delivers a phone line on their "direct DSL", they just hide the costs of regulation in the rate.
This, to me, isn't a case where sonic is to blame. This has more to do with restrictive FCC requirements than it does with Dane.
Phones are due for a regulatory rework.
Catch is, the advertised price of $25/mo for 6mbps only last one year, and you have to sign up for two years, paying $55/mo on the second.
Still beats paying $40 all around for the crappy cable latency i get here (at One block from the att repeater building!)
You're wrong. If you call AT&T, inside of their systems, they can only group dsl orders based on phone numbers. So even if they tell you you're not getting dial tone, in their system, you are getting dial tone.
This has to do with very interesting regulations from the FCC which I don't care to dive into now.
The special rate you got is the same rate you'd get by walking into an AT&T store...
one option is ADSL without a phone line taxes.
other option is cable. also, without a phone for obvious reasons
The same provisioning taxes & fees apply to the phone line itself, regardless of your usage. Sonic doesn't own the telephone line itself. AT&T or whomever does. And you can be sure they aren't letting Sonic use those lines for free.
DSL service: $40
Phone service: Free
Actual bill comes in:
DSL service: $40
Phone service taxes: $3
Phone service fees, surcharges etc, discretionary, levied by Sonic whose entire proceeds go back to them: $12
ie the "Free" phone service I do not want and do not use costs an extra 30%. If they were honest they would say this:
DSL service: $40
Mandatory phone service: $12 (no additional usage charges)
Mandatory taxes: $3
I've always been fascinated by the 'show me the tax' mindset. I'm probably in the minority but an all inclusive, up front pricing structure will always make me happier than one that has a base + taxes + fees.
I have no illusions of being able to convince you that one pricing structure is 'better' than another. But there are a lot of us out there who really don't want to know about all the components of the price.
Even if what you say is an issue, they can still show totals just as plane tickets do. They can say the total is $55/mo of which $13 is taxes.
I'm in California. Maybe you are in a state where they actually have to provide this information?
"We have no so called black boxes to covertly monitor traffic and/or pass traffic monitoring to the authorities or anyone else. Obviously the law is such that we may have to add such black boxes, but we would resist as far as possible. We may even find we are not allowed to change this web page if ever that happens. However, I, as director, am happy to answer direct questions on this matter on irc (user RevK) or on usenet and you can get paranoid if I refuse to." -- http://aa.net.uk/kb-broadband-realinternet.html
It's still a surprise to me that USA doesn't have anything like that. It's like the first time EU is first at something ;)
DJ: I would speculate it would be an unpopular move that might result in more friction with law enforcement. Law enforcement has been lobbying to pass laws that would require service providers to keep 18-36 months of logs. It’s in their interests.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Letter
The feds issue hundreds of thousands of these, and they require no warrant or judicial oversight.
NSLs can not only be issued to individuals under investigation, but "communities of interest" - so basically the social network of anyone under investigation.
* 24/7 Media
* Advertising.com
* AppNexus
* Bizo
* BlueKai
* DoubleClick
* eXelate
* Facebook Connect
* ForeSee
* Gigya Beacon
* Gigya Socialize
* Google +1
* Google AdWords Conversion
* Google Analytics
* Invite Media
* Krux Digital
* Legolas Media
* Media Innovation Group
* Right Media
* ScoreCard Research Beacon
* ShareThis
* TargusInfo
* Turn
* Vertical Acuity
* Visual Revenue
I think that's a little excessive, especially for an article about keeping logs.A small chunk of these are due to social and other 3rd party features, a good chunk plain old analytics tracking, and another small chunk are due to our "brand lift" advertising guarantees (e.g. in some cases its ensured that readers are actually seeing your below-the-fold advertisements before we charge you for them).
That said, yes, more than a few Ghostery hits are so we can, e.g., buy an ad to reach Forbes readers when you're visiting Adweek.com or something. Ghostery is great and a useful instruction tool for showing the "boiling frog" that is pixels.
Well, it's a corporate decision on the part of Forbes, so there's no point in blaming the journalist who wrote this particular article.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2012/06/22/ceo-of-...
For what it's worth, unless you retain data forever, it's always possible to delete it the day before you need it.
I love the ethos of the company, but we're suffering here and will be switching soon.
Only SF realistically has Sonic available to them. Supposedly some backwater in Central Valley has it too.