Windows 10 Pro Key Ebay Reddit

Net neutrality advocates argue that allowing cable companies the right to demand a toll to guarantee quality or premium delivery would create an exploitative business model based on the ISPs position as gatekeepers. Advocates warn that by charging websites for access, network owners may be able to block competitor Web sites and services, as well as refuse access to those unable to pay. According to Tim Wu, cable companies plan to reserve bandwidth for their own television services, and charge companies a toll for priority service. Proponents of net neutrality argue that allowing for preferential treatment of Internet traffic, or tiered service, would put newer online companies at a disadvantage and slow innovation in online services. Tim Wu argues that, without network neutrality, the Internet will undergo a transformation from a market ruled by innovation to one ruled by deal-making.

SaveTheInternet.com argues that net neutrality puts everyone on equal terms, which helps drive innovation. They claim it is a preservation of the way the Internet has always operated, where the quality of websites and services determined whether they succeeded or failed, rather than deals with ISPs. These companies would then control what is seen as well as how much it costs to see it. Speedy and secure Internet use for such industries as healthcare, finance, retailing, and gambling could be subject to large fees charged by these companies. They further explain that a majority of the great innovators in the history of the Internet started with little capital in their garages, inspired by great ideas. This was possible because the protections of net neutrality ensured limited control by owners of the networks, maximal competition in this space, and permitted innovators from outside access to the network.

Internet content was guaranteed a free and highly competitive space by the existence of net neutrality. For example, back in 2005 YouTube was just a small startup company. Due to an absence of Internet fast lanes, YouTube had the ability to grow larger than Google Video.

"Well, it turned out that people liked YouTube a lot more than Google Video, so YouTube thrived." Proponents of net neutrality argue that without new regulations, Internet service providers would be able to profit from and favor their own private protocols over others. The argument for net neutrality is that ISPs would be able to pick and choose who they offer a greater bandwidth to.

If one website or company is able to afford more, they will go with them. This especially stifles private up-and-coming businesses. ISPs are able to encourage the use of specific services by using private networks to discriminate what data is counted against bandwidth caps. For example, Comcast struck a deal with Microsoft that allowed users to stream television through the Xfinity app on their Xbox 360s without it affecting their bandwidth limit. However, utilizing other television streaming apps, such as Netflix, HBO Go, and Hulu, counted towards the limit.

Comcast denied that this infringed on net neutrality principles since "it runs its Xfinity for Xbox service on its own, private Internet protocol network". In 2009, when AT&T was bundling iPhone 3G with its 3G network service, the company placed restrictions on which iPhone applications could run on its network. According to proponents of net neutrality, this capitalization on which content producers ISPs can favor would ultimately lead to fragmentation, where some ISPs would have certain content that is not necessarily present in the networks offered by other ISPs. An example of a fragmented service would be television, where some cable providers offer exclusive media from certain content providers. The issue, as explained by Robin S. Lee and Tim Wu, is that there are literally too many ISPs and internet content providers around the world to reach an agreement on how to standardize that prioritization.

A proposed solution would be to allow all online content to be accessed and transferred freely, while simultaneously offering a "fast lane" for a preferred service that does not discriminate on the content provider. Opponents of net neutrality argue that prioritization of bandwidth is necessary for future innovation on the Internet. The added income from such services could be used to pay for the building of increased broadband access to more consumers. Supporters of net neutrality in the United States want to designate cable companies as common carriers, which would require them to allow Internet service providers free access to cable lines, the same model used for dial-up Internet.

They want to ensure that cable companies cannot screen, interrupt or filter Internet content without a court order. Common carrier status would give the FCC the power to enforce net neutrality rules. SaveTheInternet.com accuses cable and telecommunications companies of wanting the role of gatekeepers, being able to control which websites load quickly, load slowly, or do not load at all. Vinton Cerf, a co-inventor of the Internet Protocol and current vice president of Google, argues that the Internet was designed without any authorities controlling access to new content or new services. He concludes that the principles responsible for making the Internet such a success would be fundamentally undermined were broadband carriers given the ability to affect what people see and do online.

Cerf has also written about the importance of looking at problems like Net Neutrality through a combination of the Internet's layered system and the multistakeholder model that governs it. He shows how challenges can arise that can implicate Net Neutrality in certain infrastructure-based cases, such as when ISPs enter into exclusive arrangements with large building owners, leaving the residents unable to exercise any choice in broadband provider. Buying digitally delivered goods on ebay has always been a buyer beware situation.

Some sellers do deliver what is promised others are selling trial licenses that expire after a certain amount of time others are selling already used license keys. There are specific requirements for selling digitally delivered goods on ebay. If a listing does not comply with the policy, then you should avoid buying the product. I've bought no less than eight Win10 Keys off ebay from several sellers over the last few years at $2-3 each. I make sure to pick sellers with perfect ratings and tons of long time sales.

I really questioned if the keys were legit but with several system swaps and upgrades and calling Microsoft directly a few times. I just bought two spares that I haven't used for future builds. At this point, I was pretty irritated, and sent another message to the seller explaining the latest developments on getting the key activated. At this point I was not a happy customer and I wished I just spent the $99 directly with Microsoft, as I would not be encountering all of these activation issues.

While waiting to get a response back from the seller, I noticed that I now had the option to "Activate by phone" in my settings. As you can see in the first activation attempt above, that option had not previously been there. I figured "What the hell, I guess I should do it so I can prove to Kinguin the key is not activating".

I clicked on the option, selected my country, and it gave me an installation ID to provide. After answering a few questions via my phone buttons, I was connected to a customer support agent . She asked for my installation ID, and I provided it to her.

After that, she provide me the new ID and it finally activated. Digital Product Key is among the few trusted websites that deal with product keys. The website sells various digital products and software ranging from operating systems, office suites, packs, antiviruses and security software, and graphic design products. Internet routers forward packets according to the diverse peering and transport agreements that exist between network operators.

Many networks using Internet protocols now employ quality of service , and Network Service Providers frequently enter into Service Level Agreements with each other embracing some sort of QoS. There is no single, uniform method of interconnecting networks using IP, and not all networks that use IP are part of the Internet. IPTV networks are isolated from the Internet and are therefore not covered by network neutrality agreements. The IP datagram includes a 3-bit wide Precedence field and a larger DiffServ Code Point that are used to request a level of service, consistent with the notion that protocols in a layered architecture offer services through Service Access Points.

This field is sometimes ignored, especially if it requests a level of service outside the originating network's contract with the receiving network. It is commonly used in private networks, especially those including Wi-Fi networks where priority is enforced. While there are several ways of communicating service levels across Internet connections, such as SIP, RSVP, IEEE 802.11e, and MPLS, the most common scheme combines SIP and DSCP. Router manufacturers now sell routers that have logic enabling them to route traffic for various Classes of Service at "wire-speed". Opponents say that net neutrality would make it more difficult for Internet service providers and other network operators to recoup their investments in broadband networks.

Thorne and other ISPs have accused Google and Skype of freeloading or free riding for using a network of lines and cables the phone company spent billions of dollars to build. In 2008, Google published a statement speaking out against letting broadband providers abuse their market power to affect access to competing applications or content. They further equated the situation to that of the telephony market, where telephone companies are not allowed to control who their customers call or what those customers are allowed to say.

Windows 10 Pro Key Cheap Ebay However, Google's support of net neutrality was called into question in 2014. Several civil rights groups, such as the ACLU, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Free Press, SaveTheInternet, and Fight for the Future support net neutrality. Net neutrality in the United States has been a point of conflict between network users and service providers since the 1990s. Much of the conflict over net neutrality arises from how Internet services are classified by the Federal Communications Commission under authority of the Communications Act of 1934. The FCC would have significant ability to regulate ISPs should Internet services be treated as a Title II "common carrier service", or otherwise the ISPs would be mostly unrestricted by the FCC if Internet services fell under Title I "information services".

In 2009, the United States Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009, which granted a stimulus of $2.88 billion for extending broadband services into certain areas of the United States. It was intended to make the internet more accessible for under-served areas, and aspects of net neutrality and open access were written into the grant. However, the bill never set any significant precedents for net neutrality or influenced future legislation relating to net neutrality. Through 2017, the FCC has generally been favorable towards net neutrality, treating ISPs under Title II common carrier. The FCC's decisions have been a matter of several ongoing legal challenges by both states supporting net neutrality, and ISPs challenging it.

The United States Congress has attempted to pass legislation supporting net neutrality but have failed to gain sufficient support. Senate, with Republicans Lisa Murkowski, John Kennedy and Susan Collins joining all 49 Democrats but the House majority denied the bill a hearing. Individual states have been trying to pass legislation to make net neutrality a requirement within their state, overriding the FCC's decision. California has successfully passed its own net neutrality act, which the United States Department of Justice challenged on a legal basis. Justice Department withdrew its challenge to California's data protection law. Federal Communications Commission Acting Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel voiced support for an open internet and restoring net neutrality.

In contrast, a "closed Internet" refers to the opposite situation, wherein established persons, corporations, or governments favor certain uses, restrict access to necessary web standards, artificially degrade some services, or explicitly filter out content. Some countries such as Thailand block certain websites or types of sites, and monitor and/or censor Internet use using Internet police, a specialized type of law enforcement, or secret police. Other countries such as Russia, China, and North Korea also use similar tactics to Thailand in order to control the variety of internet media within their respective countries.

In comparison to the United States or Canada for example, these countries have far more restrictive internet service providers. This approach is reminiscent of a Closed Platform system, as both ideas are highly similar. These systems all serve to hinder access to a wide variety of internet service, which is a stark contrast to the idea of an open Internet system.

This following personal account does not have anything to do with obviously questionable / fake / stolen $2 Windows licenses sold on places like Ebay. While they might activate, common sense would dictate a legitimate seller would charge more than such a small amount for a Windows license. Those licenses are very likely not "grey market", but instead "black market". Buykeys.com is among the few stores that deal exclusively with digital products. As such, you can get a variety of product keys for games and software, including operating systems, antivirus, and office suite.

Alok Bhardwaj, founder of Epic Privacy Browser, argues that any violations to network neutrality, realistically speaking, will not involve genuine investment but rather payoffs for unnecessary and dubious services. He believes that it is unlikely that new investment will be made to lay special networks for particular websites to reach end-users faster. Rather, he believes that non-net neutrality will involve leveraging quality of service to extract remuneration from websites that want to avoid being slowed down. This theory was confirmed in 2014 when Netflix announced it was making payments to Comcast and Verizon to avoid throttling, slower Internet speeds for particular services or websites, by those ISPs. These payments were described by Netflix founder Reed Hastings as "an arbitrary tax" and "arbitrary interconnection tolls". In Canada, Internet service providers generally provide Internet service in a neutral manner.

Some notable incidents otherwise have included Bell Canada's throttling of certain protocols and Telus's censorship of a specific website supporting striking union members. On October 22, 2009, the CRTC issued a ruling about internet traffic management, which favored adopting guidelines that were suggested by interest groups such as OpenMedia.ca and the Open Internet Coalition. However, the guidelines set in place require citizens to file formal complaints proving that their internet traffic is being throttled, and as a result, some ISPs still continue to throttle internet traffic of its users. Net neutrality is administered on a national or regional basis, though much of the world's focus has been on the conflict over net neutrality in the United States. Net neutrality in the US has been a topic since the early 1990s, as they were one of the world leaders in online service providing.

In 2019, the Save the Internet Act to "guarantee broadband internet users equal access to online content" was passed by the United States House of Representatives but not by the US Senate. However, they face the same problems as the rest of the world. Finding an appropriate solution by creating more regulation for Internet service providers has been a major work in progress. Net neutrality rules were repealed in the US in 2017 during the Trump administration and subsequent appeals have upheld the ruling. That said, I don't deal with buying items out of a van, or items that I know are illegal like $2 Windows 10 licenses on Ebay, or from some unknown private seller.

However, say if there was a legit retailer in another country, and they could sell me an item much cheaper than I could buy it here because they paid less for it , and it didn't violate any law, I would possibly give it a shot. That doesn't mean that I would do it if it was going to be time consuming and headache like my experience was here. Like I said, if I had a time machine and saw what would happen, I probably wouldn't have done it all. The only times I have ever had to call MS to activate, is when the key has been previously used. Sounds like you bought a used key, not a new legitimate key.

I'm sure Kinguin and other sites like them know exactly what is being sold. If it were legit, it seems like there would also be US based sellers. Upgrading my PC recently, I was intrigued enough to try it out. Previously, I had purchased a retail copy of Windows 10 Home at Best Buy, so I could transfer that license to my new PC without any worries.

However, I really wanted my new PC to have Windows 10 PRO for features like being able to "sandbox" suspicious links or programs. Microsoft offered me that very option in my settings, all for the low price of $99. The license keys sold on the site won't work when looking to upgrade Windows 10 Home to Windows 10 Pro. RoyalCDKeys also has positive reviews on Trustpilot, implying it sells legitimate products most of the time. The keys we're talking about here are often found on key reselling marketplaces like G2A , Kinguin, and many other smaller sites.

These sites also sell gray-market video game keys, which are also of questionable origin and may be revoked in the future. Polygon, a gaming website, has a good look at the problem with gray market game keys. An Australian college student who goes by /u/AmiableAustralian also had thoughts on the negative side of trading.