dwbrite / ajitvpai.com Goto Github PK

We have some great content, but I think the next step is moving it around. We want to create a clear and concise order so things make sense following one another and everything is easy to read and find.

Feel free to post your thoughts below.

As a preemptive measure, what are the technologies in place to ensure uptime?

What is the general structure and config of the deployment on the server?

How do I add my commits?
I keep getting "unable to access https://github.com/dwbrite/ajitvpai.com.git requested URL returned error: 403.

What do I need to do?

Transitioning from sections "What does all of this mean?" (Dark Background) to "Potential problems..." (light background) is killer on the eyes.

That section alone is still having issues with punctuation as seen here: http://i.imgur.com/SBwGBYd.png

On Linux, Google Chrome version 58.0.3029.110. May be an issue with Chrome's auto encoding as the page is UTF-8, but Chrome no longer allows manually setting encoding, and does auto encoding.

Not sure which cert service you're using, but https://letsencrypt.org/ provides free and valid certs.

They admitted in court -- 5 times -- that they want to slow down or block websites that don't pay them to allow Verizon customers through, and that they want to structure plans as shown in the infographic you have on the site. People should know this. Otherwise the casual user can dismiss this site as propaganda. Let them see it for themselves.

https://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2013/09/18/verizons-plan-break-internet

That URL links to the audio recordings of the oral arguments, so anyone can listen to the Verizon lawyer and hear it for themselves.

Great idea for the site BTW.

I'm reffering to a suggestion someone made to replace "save net neutrality" with "stop ISPs from blocking Netflix".

When we talk about net neutrality as a general term you need to explain a little before it becomes relevant to the average reader, instead let's part from a specific relevant example and generalize over it.

Eg. "Without Title 2 you could be charged extra to watch Netflix, even worse, ISPs can legally block Netflix effectively forcing you to pay for X other service of their own.. no matter how crappy it is.

This also applies to any other site you may want to visit! Even this one could be blocked if they wanted to, which means they could block news and information they conveniently don't want you to see, or any other service that they don't want you to use (Google wallet example)."

The point on internet highways was a bit vague and I don't think it portrays the severity of the problem well enough. It could be misinterpreted as a speed boost rather than a restriction.

Sending comments to the FCC has, in the past two weeks, proven to be an unreliable way to voice an opinion to the Commission.

We would do well to provide template pages such as Mozilla's https://dearfcc.org/ which do not force a single opinion but does allow a forum wherein an individual can send their own thoughts on the issue (for or against) to their state representatives.

State House rulings have significant weight in getting items to the Congressional level.

Would the article do well to get a complete list of those Reps. in collusion with ISPs against NN?

If so:

What House or Senate reps are against NN at both State and Federal Levels?

What House or Senate members accepted large donations from ISPs, in what denominations were those donations given, and from which ISPs or representatives of those companies were they from?

What kind of automation can we use to scrape this information (as opposed to crowdsourcing it)?

Furthermore, would this kind of information require a second route other than /?

There have been many examples where ISPs have violated net neutrality such as throttling Netflix. This website should list and cite them.

I think the readability of the site could be improved by reducing the line lenght. Here is a guideline by Google. (Not really an issue, just a suggestion)

When I first opened the website, my first thought was that it was an advertisement for Comcast/Verizon and immediately wanted to close the page.

Maybe decreasing the size of the logos, and increasing the font size of "Ruining the Internet as we know it" would be better

I'm running at 1920x1080 resolution and the masthead image flows off the bottom of the screen. The emotional tagline "Ruining the Internet as we know it" isn't visible above the fold. Recommend cropping the top image a bit. Not sure how it looks at all other resolutions, though a quick test with the Chrome dev tools shows it above the fold in at least a few other resolutions.

Screenshot: https://imgur.com/a/KdCzt

I am not cognizant of what the legal issues are in using somebody's name as a domain without their consent.

Could someone else chime in on this?

I suppose at this point of time the site is severely lacking gummy dicks. The before-mentioned objects come in several colors and sizes but in quite similar shapes to the doors of FCC officials. I hope my suggestion is quite understandable.

Please consider looking at the following references below:
https://shipabagofdicks.com
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4bHiuDuXJs

https://www.att.com/support/internet/usage.html

AT&T Internet plans

You will receive an email notice the first time your usage exceeds the monthly data allowance. In subsequent months we will continue to send you alerts if your usage approaches or exceeds the amount of data included in your plan. If you exceed your monthly data plan a third time (bill cycle), and as our agreement provides, we’ll charge you $10 for each additional 50GB of data provided to you that month. The maximum overage charge is $100 a month for AT&T Internet and $200 a month for DSL and Fixed Wireless Internet.

A $30 unlimited data allowance is also available for AT&T Internet customers to purchase as an optional feature of your Internet service. Or if you purchase DIRECTV or U-verse TV service with your Internet service on a combined bill, you will receive an unlimited usage allowance. That’s a $30 value at no additional charge as part of the discount. This is only available for AT&T Internet, not DSL or Fixed Wireless Internet.

This is a really well-designed website already, with great use of space, font clarity, only important high impact images and short text points.

The use of grey background for "POTENTIAL PROBLEMS" and potential outcomes is genius.

However, I would recommend you are careful how you use large swathes of the color red. This always has a warning, high impact or even adversarial tone.

So, perhaps for example remove the total red background from the "friendly"-toned "WHAT IS TITLE II?" and make that blue background like "WHAT IS NET NEUTRALITY" or white background.

This would leave the critical consequences of ignoring or supporting anti-net neutrality in the only big red block: "WHAT DOES ALL OF THIS MEAN?"

Something weird is going on with the apostrophes in the "What is Net Neutrality..." section.

Just for the site to be a little more complete a favicon would be nice.

I think by making the URL in the address bar always display as https just carries extra credibility for the content on the site. I've used CloudFlare in the past to do this with GitHub Pages. The steps in this link should work.

https://hackernoon.com/set-up-ssl-on-github-pages-with-custom-domains-for-free-a576bdf51bc

There seems to be quite a few contradictions at the onset of the literature.

We can't say we know exactly, but it appears that his intentions might be to make more money for existing ISPs that control the United States. We do know, however, that most of the arguments against Net Neutrality revolve around money.

First, we 'cant say we know' why money is involved on Pai's behalf, then 'we do know' that it is being funneled. Both are provided without any sources.

How do we know what we do and don't know? As tediously epistemological as this this kind of inquiry is, it absolutely needs sources should it be able to hold its ground.

Concerning the use of the image https://i.imgur.com/qtENxAG.jpg, I feel it would be better to explicitly state the nature of it in a caption and attribution of the creator insofar as it may be construed as reality in the way it's currently shown.

In my mind the following wording doesn't seem to fully explain what is going on:

Create website packages - without Net Neutrality we may have to pay to access certain websites and services. Imagine that.

Perhaps something with a Thumbnail+Caption layout would be more prudent:

In my mind, the caption would be something akin to:

Here is an example of what revoking Title II may ultimately result in. Note that while it's not legal currently to effectuate this approach by ISPs – and know that they've have taken great pains to show how they are not currently doing so through self-serving rhetoric [citations needed] – this kind of approach would absolutely be within their legal right should Title II be annulled.

I suck at writing, so please do not use that; it's an approximation of the tack desired.

Further (and this may be better to discuss in a separate issue), I feel the image would have more efficacy in a conclusion paragraph later in the page.