Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • AndyPix
    • By AndyPix 15th Mar 17, 4:54 PM
    • 2,774Posts
    • 1,892Thanks
    AndyPix
    ISP Censorship
    • #1
    • 15th Mar 17, 4:54 PM
    ISP Censorship 15th Mar 17 at 4:54 PM
    Hi Guys


    Has anyone else read this info with a bit of trepidation ??


    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/03/14/uk_new_realtime_live_server_blocking_order/


    It seems to me this is an initial test of real-time censorship , which is a sad day for the internet
    Running with scissors since 1978
Page 4
    • kwikbreaks
    • By kwikbreaks 17th Mar 17, 6:37 PM
    • 8,839 Posts
    • 4,416 Thanks
    kwikbreaks
    I don't think so. Your point is that ISPs will be putting obstacles in the way of getting free football streams. I'm simply saying that in anything but the very short term it is unlikely to work.

    Additionally the tech level bar to setting up kodi on a variety of devices is the ability to enter a Google search together with the ability to follow step by step level instructions. Overcoming whatever gets put in place will likely only amount to a small change to those instructions.

    What level of technical ability is needed to circumvent the earlier piracy prevention measures such as cd and DVD ripping?
    • johndough
    • By johndough 17th Mar 17, 7:28 PM
    • 651 Posts
    • 250 Thanks
    johndough
    Hi

    My thought is block UDP packets from the sender for a coupla hours. Yeah I realise I aint defined the sender, but the stripped away contents should be decipherable as a football match.

    Block the port numbers, EG: 531 for AOL Instant Messenger to start with ;~)

    The sender will transmit on a defined port number, so don't route (or send it to 127.0.0.1).
    • forgotmyname
    • By forgotmyname 18th Mar 17, 2:16 AM
    • 25,872 Posts
    • 10,301 Thanks
    forgotmyname
    I have no interest in football but it makes me want to watch stream it to see what they are doing to block the access.

    Single IP to the server or an IP range or the entire thing which could knock a lot of websites offline also?

    johndough.. Block AOL messenger.. sacrilege? eeee I remember when AOL were great and the sun always shined...

    Then some stupid company called CPW took over and killed it stone dead.
    Punctuation, Spelling and Grammar will be used sparingly. Due to rising costs of inflation.

    My contribution to MSE. Other contributions will only be used if they cost me nothing.

    Due to me being a tight git.
    • hans 2
    • By hans 2 18th Mar 17, 5:13 PM
    • 376 Posts
    • 217 Thanks
    hans 2
    What's the verdict then?

    My streams were not affected at all,
    Last edited by hans 2; 18-03-2017 at 5:23 PM.
    • Johno100
    • By Johno100 18th Mar 17, 5:25 PM
    • 3,001 Posts
    • 3,216 Thanks
    Johno100
    What's the verdict then?

    My streaming was not affected at all,
    Originally posted by hans 2
    Makes two of us, not watching the 5.30 match because I've got the rugby on, but everything was working fine for the early match and the 3.00pm ones.
    • kwikbreaks
    • By kwikbreaks 18th Mar 17, 6:56 PM
    • 8,839 Posts
    • 4,416 Thanks
    kwikbreaks
    So were those OK without VPNs or with?
    • hans 2
    • By hans 2 18th Mar 17, 6:59 PM
    • 376 Posts
    • 217 Thanks
    hans 2
    Without on mine.
    • Johno100
    • By Johno100 18th Mar 17, 7:48 PM
    • 3,001 Posts
    • 3,216 Thanks
    Johno100
    So were those OK without VPNs or with?
    Originally posted by kwikbreaks
    Without....
    • kwikbreaks
    • By kwikbreaks 19th Mar 17, 2:17 PM
    • 8,839 Posts
    • 4,416 Thanks
    kwikbreaks
    Either not effective or not yet applied then. Unless your ISPs weren't part of the trial of course.
    • RumRat
    • By RumRat 19th Mar 17, 3:04 PM
    • 2,507 Posts
    • 1,365 Thanks
    RumRat
    I doubt they'll try very hard....
    Drinking Rum before 10am makes you
    A PIRATE
    Not an Alcoholic...!
    • anajames
    • By anajames 22nd Mar 17, 10:21 AM
    • 29 Posts
    • 50 Thanks
    anajames
    Unless they have not blocked the vpn, let's enjoy the services. That is all i have to say.
    • DiamondLil
    • By DiamondLil 10th Apr 17, 10:40 AM
    • 251 Posts
    • 226 Thanks
    DiamondLil
    To all those who post on this thread I thank you; I'm following avidly and learning a lot.
    This topic is important to me and anyone else who values the freedoms we have become accustomed to.
    • almillar
    • By almillar 11th Apr 17, 1:13 PM
    • 7,064 Posts
    • 2,827 Thanks
    almillar
    When the BBC gave Sky Formula 1 they took the sport away from me forever. The nature of the sport is such that I needed to watch it live and what I enjoyed was the fact that anything could happen and it probably would. I saw this as a betrayal by the BBC and more monopolistic practices by Sky.
    BBC were required to save money, and couldn't justify the cost of F1. They gave it to C4 AND Sky.

    There is NO LOSS of custom because nobody who takes such content was ever in the market to buy the product because it had been priced out of their market

    If you wrote a book, and I managed to get a PDF of it for free, would you be happy enough for me to read it without paying?
    • DavidP24
    • By DavidP24 11th Apr 17, 1:33 PM
    • 939 Posts
    • 1,160 Thanks
    DavidP24
    BBC were required to save money, and couldn't justify the cost of F1. They gave it to C4 AND Sky.
    Originally posted by almillar
    Heard it all before, excuses, sold fans out which is why I hate BBC now. Nothing you or anyone else says is going to change the way I feel, you have your opinion and are entitled to it, as am I.

    BBC spent a billion pounds on a new office, Google makes $30bn a year they would not waste a billion on an office. BBC wasted fortune on new carpet a year later, they needed something more creative.

    BBC IT Contractors are paid way over the odds, about double what some public sector organisations pay for same skills.

    They are fat and top heavy.

    They suffer from OPM, spending other people's money.

    There is NO LOSS of custom because nobody who takes such content was ever in the market to buy the product because it had been priced out of their market

    If you wrote a book, and I managed to get a PDF of it for free, would you be happy enough for me to read it without paying?
    Originally posted by almillar
    [QUOTE=almillar;72386978]

    If I priced my book badly and you could not afford it I would have no problem with you to reading it without paying, as long as you told your friends what a fantastic read it was.

    I help loads of people, sometimes they can't afford it, sometimes they do not really want to pay, it call comes back in good Karma.
    Thanks, don't you just hate people with sigs !
    • The all new me
    • By The all new me 12th Apr 17, 8:33 AM
    • 26 Posts
    • 69 Thanks
    The all new me
    It was reported in The Standard that Google's new offices in King Cross cost more than a £Billion. They have far fewer employees to accomodate than the BBC.
    • DavidP24
    • By DavidP24 12th Apr 17, 10:10 AM
    • 939 Posts
    • 1,160 Thanks
    DavidP24
    It was reported in The Standard that Google's new offices in King Cross cost more than a £Billion. They have far fewer employees to accomodate than the BBC.
    Originally posted by The all new me
    I stand corrected! Google DID spend a billion dollars but you are mistaken about the staff number, Google will house 5000 in one office on the site, the BBC of course had 145 acres!!

    The 1-million-sq-ft (93,000 sq m) office will sit on 2.4 acres (1 hectare) of land between Kings Cross and St Pancras stations. When the deal was announced in January, it was one of the biggest ever commercial property acquisitions in Britain. Reuters reports Google will spend £650 million ($1.05 billion) to buy and develop the site, with an eventual worth of £1 billion.
    Originally posted by QZ
    https://qz.com/139794/inside-googles-new-1-million-square-foot-london-office-three-years-before-its-ready/
    Originally posted by DavidP24
    I guess the difference is that Google does not rely on handouts enforced by Crapita Goons who lie their way into homes, even entering when only a minor is present,

    Google is building something very different and it can, because it makes the money and does not rely on handouts (just prudential use of Tax avoidance)

    The day the BBC is funded by subscription and sales of it's library will be the day I salute it and do not give a damn about what it spends.

    Something tells me that the BBC did not make a profit or even break even on the whole property project for the 145 acre site.

    http://www.homesandproperty.co.uk/property-news/buying/new-homes/5000-new-bbc-tv-centre-and-white-city-homes-go-on-sale-creating-londons-biggest-new-neighbourhood-49301.html

    The national audit office certainly thinks the BBC is spending 300% more than it should be in running costs.

    The BBC's new £1 billion headquarters cost £13,000 for every member of staff to run, three times more than similar commercial buildings.

    A damning report by the National Audit Office found that the corporation's new headquarters cost £89 million a year to run, equivalent to a third of the corporation's running costs.

    Margaret Hodge, chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, said that the figure appeared to be "ridiculously" high and called on the BBC to explain itself.

    The National Audit Office said that the BBC needs to make "better use of space to achieve value for money" after it found that building's running costs dwarf those of the rest of the corporation.

    It found that Broadcasting House cost three times more than similar UK properties to run and 49 per cent more than similar properties in London
    Originally posted by The Telepraph
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/11360071/BBCs-headquarters-cost-13000-for-every-member-of-staff-to-run.html
    Originally posted by DavidP24
    For me the BBC is a lost opportunity, the one thing that most TV companies lack is content, they have to build new content. The BBC however has the ability to put it's entire library online and sell it around the world. It could stop giving it away for a song to Sky and become a force in TV around the world.

    It could also make more popular TV, in the US they love Luther, but they make hardly any episodes.

    The management at the BBC are a joke, just look at the Bake Off debacle, to not put restrictions in the contract was incompetence in my opinion. Top Gear, F1 et al, just a few more examples.

    I could go on, suffice to say they suffer from the same disease you see in all kinds of public sector organisations, except most of those are now suffering under austerity but the BBC does not blink and eye.

    The problem is that Turkeys do not vote for Christmas, so like the NHS which is also top heavy with management, they will throw the real staff under the bus rather than make themselves redundant.
    Thanks, don't you just hate people with sigs !
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

362Posts Today

2,847Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @LordsEconCom: On Tuesday Martin Lewis, Hannah Morrish & Shakira Martin gave evidence to the Cttee. Read the full transcript here: https?

  • Ta ta for now. Half term's starting, so I'm exchanging my MoneySavingExpert hat for one that says Daddy in big letters. See you in a week.

  • RT @thismorning: Can @MartinSLewis' deals save YOU cash? ???? https://t.co/igbHCwzeiN

  • Follow Martin