Need the Net, but Have No Money

[ProJiJi]

Am I to draw the conclusion that you do not agree to the idea of the IGF?

I mean, I did point to that particular project.

[GAhere]

But I suspect I am forgetting that you have outlined your view in some previous post here that you don't agree that Yahoo should be held to account for no notification about changes in security parameters, correct?

So no problem there. You have a different view of priorities than I have.

But that view that we are required to march to the beat of the Big Gals/Guys leading us down this mighty Net Highway is fraught with danger. What if Google suddenly, without warning, decided if you don't have Windows 11 you are not going to be able to access any Google service, including GMail? Big Gals/Guys Google and Microsoft make a backroom deal to get Windows 11 profitable in the future because so many people don't like it and so BAM! Google closes the door and no announcement.

According to your point of view, GAhere, that is just fine, right?

Yahoo mail Did warn EVERYONE many, many years ago about what versions of browser they will commit to supporting.

From https://www.tumblr.com/yahoomail/85155936276/an-update-to-yahoo-mails-supported-browser-policy

They fully indicated that they are narrowing the amount of browser versions that they will support/develop for.


[Attachment 91314 - Click to enlarge]

Kindly note the area I highlighted.

"As a result, beginning June 5, Yahoo Mail is updating its supported web browser policy to cover only the two most recent versions of Firefox, Internet Explorer, Chrome and Safari."


Also note worthy is that was issued 5 yrs AFTER IE 8 was fully sunsetted..

MS pulled the plug on IE 8 Oct 13, 2020..

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/products/internet-explorer-8


[Attachment 91315 - Click to enlarge]

My goodness, the "sky is falling" . people have been warned, this isn't something that has "suddenly" happened. Browser technology advances on whether you or myself like it and as newer security protocols are developed and added to newer browser versions all Internet websites will be forced to move on and require more secure protocols to be uses that the older no longer developed browsers are not capable of using.

Have worked in many different IT roles over the years, change IS inevitable.

[GAhere]

I'm very likely repeating myself here, and I'm sorry for that; as I have had to participate in multiple discussions on many sites over the past year relating to the sudden uptick in bot trouble; I was pretty much out of all loops on the Net until maybe March or so last year.

Upon some requests for assistance on certain security work I think about mid 2025 I started spotting more than I expected folks that were also using this same setup of an older Windows 7 unit and I collected some data, but stashed it away because it was just collected from curiosity and not too important back about July/August of last year.

But just now I decided to take another quick look and this is just one result and I use this here because the editors/writers of that piece added many references to verify their points/numbers:

October 2025
https://www.gbnews.com/tech/windows7-market-share-increase-statcounter

According to StatCounter, Windows 7 has been rapidly gaining market share in recent weeks — a full five years after support for the desktop operating system was officially terminated. At the latest count, Windows 7 is now used by some 22.65% of all Windows PCs worldwide. That's an increase from the 18.97% just a little over a month ago.

And then scrolling down their page is this:

So, why has there been a recent surge?

It appears that Asia is the main area of the world responsible for the increase, making up 40% of all users currently using Windows 7.

“It’s not about preference as much as practicality,” says Dr Lian Zhou, a digital infrastructure researcher at the National University of Singapore, told Indian Reference Review. “In rural areas or public institutions with tight budgets, reactivating old machines with Windows 7 is often the only viable choice.”

I can understand why so many in the rich nations around the planet want to keep pushing this narrative that we must follow the leader (the tech giants) and keep buying into this-or-that about how websites won't let those using the older Windows 7 units onto their websites, but "Have No Money" was a key point of the title of this thread and now I'll ask you to give thought to what Dr. Zhou has asserted.

And if that isn't enough, I could find a number of other "experts" that are also indicating that, as of late, there are MORE people going back to Windows 7 for reasons other than money.

Many, many people are getting fed up with the intrusive methods that Microsoft has become more and more reliant upon to keep their shareholders happy.

The "data" and conclusions given above are incorrect.

Going from the real source of data

https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/desktop/worldwide

There HAS been a DROP in Win7 usage to just barely 1.05% over Jan 2025 to Jan 2026..


[Attachment 91316 - Click to enlarge]

If you look at the actual chart, there HAS been a sharp DECREASE in Win7 usage from Dec 2025 to Jan2026 (yellow line), while there was a very small increase from Oct 2025 to Dec 2025, it may have been nothing more than rounding errors in the data. That increase was so small that it would be considered "statistically insignificant"..


[Attachment 91317 - Click to enlarge]

Something to also consider, "MOBILE" device OSs (iPhone/Android cellphone, tablet) market share are much greater (51.73% combined) than the "desktop/laptop" market share..

(32.52% all versions of Windows), (Mac OS 2.28%), (OS-X 3.38%), (Other/Unknown/Linux 7.38%) All combined 45.56% ..


[Attachment 91318 - Click to enlarge]


[Attachment 91319 - Click to enlarge]

What does this mean?

Well basically, MORE people are using their Cellphones (Iphone/Android) and tablets (Ipads/Android) devices to access Internet than traditional PC/Mac (desktop and laptops) now days.

[thecoalman]

Am I to draw the conclusion that you do not agree to the idea of the IGF?

I mean, I did point to that particular project.

I'm pretty sure I answered your question with "I do not". I have internet at what I consider fairly reasonable price/speed as does most of the country, if I I have low income and was unable to afford it there is numerous ways to obtain it through government/ private partnerships here in the US. If you qualify you can get 75mbps plan for $15/month from my ISP. That's what it cost for 56K connection in the 90's. On the public side I can buy a hosting plan here in the US starting at $3 a month with generous limitations, that's less than what it cost in the 90's. Most important of all with the exception of direct threats and criminal activity I can say just about anything I want on the internet without having to worry about the police knocking at my door.. Note that an opinion no matter how vile it may be that will get you arrested in a lot of countries is not criminal activity here in the US.

What possible benefit could a US citizen get allowing some international agency to dictate policy? The answer is none.

[ProJiJi]

Yes, thecoalman I also felt you had provided the idea you would not be a supporter of the IGF, but I just wanted to be sure on that point.

Sort of checking to be sure that your view is international cooperation and international agreements on matters related to your use of the Internet are of no concern to you. I think I understand that to be an accurate summery, yes?

And to address another member's thoughts: GAhere, are you familiar with the following numbers?

Reaffirming their commitment to the multistakeholder model and making the Internet Governance Forum permanent is critical, because the model works. Imperfectly, yes. But remarkably well: In 2025, the number of people without Internet connectivity is 2.2 billion, down from over 3.2 billion people a decade ago. For those in our line of work, we know that number is significant. It represents a 32% decline in unconnected people, even as the global population grows by 83 million people a year.

Why the UN’s Next Decision on Internet Governance Matters for Everyone

That is over two billion fellow human beings. And maybe we could be super safe and just make that one billion human beings, because maybe that other one billion are les than 16 years of age. I'm just guessing.

And I am also guessing that when push comes to shove those that are engaging in discussion in this thread really could care less about those one billion other humans. Which is an attitude that I can understand, because I was also in the grasp of that sort of thought process when I was much younger. And there is no excuse for my being so narrow-minded during those days/years. I have, though, been trying to fix my brain's MO over the past decade or so. Not easy to do so, either, as I have such a slow functioning brain.

But when one sees that number of one billion, one ought to pay attention. Even idiots like me can realize that.

By the way, Ms. Wentworth was not the ISOC CEO I had that falling out with so many years ago and that I think I posted about around here in some thread. (Maybe on another tech site; so forgive my error, if it is such.)

In fact, I think I remember Ms. Wentworth was still working at the White House when I had my troubles with the ISOC.

<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

NOTE: And that reference to up to a billion people who have no Internet access connects the dots that was requested by another, who has yet to contribute publicly to this discussion. I would have connect that earlier if the Section 230 legal apparatus had not been brought forth.

[ProJiJi]

GAhere, why is it you are pushing so hard the point of view that the individual customers/users on the Internet have no say in how that Internet should be governed?

I mean, I commend how you pull information out from years ago that support your point of view. I don't think I commend the "yelling" you use (that huge font stuff).

I commend that you make use of so much graphics.

But why don't you simply make the statement that you personally feel we little people have no rights on the Net and be done with this discussion?

Or do you feel some discomfort with such a final/bold statement?

[thecoalman]

And I am also guessing that when push comes to shove those that are engaging in discussion in this thread really could care less about those one billion other humans.

I'm a firm believer in charity begins at home and I'm already contributing a significant amount through taxes. Fixing global issues is not on my radar. While any of these government run programs here in the US need significant more oversight to reduce fraud, waste, corruption and the enormous bureaucracy built around them sucking up the funding at the end of the day I still believe they can be beneficial.

There is more than enough problems here in the US where my charity can benefit my fellow Americans. I'll choose to solve those problems because when my fellow Americans do well I do even better.

[abolibibelot]

Holy mackerel, that's gotta be the most off-topic topic in the history of topics...

I barely read 10% of the whole discussion (when I feel like a post may be a bit long winded, it has to be on the gigantic side of overlong for the vast majority of contemporary earthlings), but what I did read might finally convince me to move on from Windows 7... if only so that I don't end up writing (normally that's where I oughta add a pointless “no offense”) mind-numbingly meandering ramblings 17 years from now...
(But my own case may be just as bad as I'm still hanging on to Outlook Express and was foolish enough to ask on here about an astonishingly niche issue I had with that piece of antiquated abandonware... only to painstakingly solve it by myself... and then stop using the fixed feature anyway, now that I'm aware of the stupid design flaw which triggered said issue in the first place... It's like driving an old car that ya can't get rid of 'cuz you're so accustomed to the feel of the cushions and the size of the cupholder, with a quirky trunk that suddenly won't open once it's been opened exactly 499 times in a row – e.g. for putting a $300 hooker inside –, then managing to open it again by asking the leprechauns inside to wipe the registry of what was put inside the trunk each of those 499 times, then stop using the damn trunk altogether because it's so horrifying to do something when you know beforehand that you can do it no more than 499 times before the same stupid shit kicks in again, even though you now know the remedy, it only reminds you of your own mortality, and the fact that we normally never know exactly how many times we'll eventually get allotted to accomplish a particular action, however trivial or however glorious it may be... Reminds me of a magnificent quote I read long ago in the Wikipedia article on Brandon Lee, and which has been inscribed on his tombstone: “Because we don't know when we will die, we get to think of life as an inexhaustible well. And yet everything happens only a certain number of times, and a very small number really. How many more times will you remember a certain afternoon of your childhood, an afternoon that is so deeply a part of your being that you can't even conceive of your life without it? Perhaps four, or five times more? Perhaps not even that. How many more times will you watch the full moon rise? Perhaps twenty. And yet it all seems limitless...” ~ Paul Bowles, The Sheltering Sky)

Holy mackerel, I don't accomplish much these days, but I can still take even the most off-topic of topics and turn its off-topic-ness up to eleven... which is like my special super power...
And now I need to go the f**k to sleep...

[ProJiJi]

Thank you for your support, abolibibelot, and I am especially impressed that you are able to represent "the vast majority of contemporary Earthlings" but am I correct to conclude that includes those 2.2 billion Earthlings cited by Ms. Wentworth?
That quote from her article would fall within your 10% limit of patience.

... the number of people without Internet connectivity is 2.2 billion ...

BUT, it might be polite to members and guests to be sure they understand three or four of your links are to YouTube videos or shorts. I don't know which, as I only used "view-source" to see why there were so many links and where they took folks.

Personally, if a member puts a YouTube link into a bit of their writing/contribution, I view it as polite to be sure the members/guests are aware of that. I thought I saw some link to a wiki page of some sort, too. You do a lot of keyboard surfing, eh?

Anyway, I appreciate your vote of confidence. Thank you.

[lumaField]

I had some experience with very bad internet myself, fortunately not for very long, but it was enough to understand how different things look in that situation. When the connection is slow or unstable and the hardware is old, advice like just upgrade the system, just install another browser or just buy a newer computer stops being as simple as it sounds.

Because of that I can understand part of what is being said here. Sometimes people are not refusing to move forward, they are simply trying to work with whatever they have available and get the most out of it.

At the same time the technical reality is also true. Old operating systems and old browsers gradually lose support and more and more websites stop working with them. That part cannot really be avoided.

From my point of view both sides are partly right. Technology moves on, but for people with weak internet or limited resources the transition is not always easy. In situations like that it probably helps more to share practical solutions or explain the limits calmly rather than assume people are just being stubborn.