guhuna
R.I.P Mike
Premium
join:2001-03-31
Brentwood, CA | hell ya. No matter what, pirates are always going to come out on top. | |
|
 |
 | |
| | 
james
join:2001-02-26
antarctica
| Re: hell ya. Bad argument. I have a car, I should be able to run over whoever I want with it!
A better point would be that copyright enforcement is not beneficial to either the artist or the consumer. The only people getting rich off the current copyright scheme are the middle men who contribute nothing. They USED to contribute by promoting bands and distributing their content, but now all that can be done by the average computer savy child. | |
|
| | | 
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
 ·Comcast
| Re: hell ya. said by james  :Bad argument. I have a car, I should be able to run over whoever I want with it! A better point would be that copyright enforcement is not beneficial to either the artist or the consumer. The only people getting rich off the current copyright scheme are the middle men who contribute nothing. They USED to contribute by promoting bands and distributing their content, but now all that can be done by the average computer savy child. Very well said.... | |
|
| | | raduque
join:2006-07-03
Corpus Christi, TX
| Bad analogy! This is more like the city doing something to the roads to prevent you from moving out of the lane you're in because there's a chance you might hit somebody on the side of the road.
Streets are open and free. It's up to you to follow or break the law and use the streets in a considerate way.
The same should be said of the SERVICE you are PAYING FOR. | |
|
| | | | 
zachary1
you talkin' to me?
join:2004-03-07
right here | Re: hell ya. Freedom would include freedom to obey, or break, any law. | |
|
| | | 
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
1 edit | said by james :The only people getting rich off the current copyright scheme are the middle men who contribute nothing. Wrong, they contribute the ability to absorb risk and knowledge of the market.
If this weren't so bands wouldn't sign contracts with them.
--
Mooooooo!!! | |
|
| | | jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL | Good thing there's no pirated software available as .torrents... 
It's not just about music and movies.  | |
|
| | | |
james
join:2001-02-26
antarctica
| Re: hell ya. Yeah  Poor Adobe Photoshop became the standard for photo editing because of all that damned piracy! I wonder how many people actually paid for photoshop while they were learning on it and screwing around.
I downloaded a pirated copy of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and loved it, then I saw it on Steam and bought it.
I downloaded a pirated copy of Maya and have been learning how to use it, supposing I get good at 3d modeling and actually make money with it. I will then spend the money for a license (mostly because the penalty for corporate users is pretty bad).
Small amounts of piracy can be very good for a product. I'm not saying everyone should get everything for free, I'm just saying it's not as black and white as the lawyers are trying to make us think.
I make an exception for those who charge "customers" for the pirated product. Those are what the definition of Pirate SHOULD be. Anyone sharing for free shouldn't be punished, everyone knows sharing is caring 3 . | |
|
| | | jtorre69
join:2005-12-26
Hollywood, FL
| Bad argument. I have a car, I should be able to run over whoever I want with it!
A better point would be that copyright enforcement is not beneficial to either the artist or the consumer. The only people getting rich off the current copyright scheme are the middle men who contribute nothing. They USED to contribute by promoting bands and distributing their content, but now all that can be done by the average computer savy child.
You totally missed the point. I think the whole problem stems from the fact that comcast limits and caps your data. This whole post would not have been an issue if they named their service "limited hsi". | |
|
| | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| If you want a pipe you can do with as you please, then you should look into a T-1 or something similar. It appears that DSL allows people to use their service much more freely... there's your answer.
Just in case you claim that DSL isn't available in your ares, that excuse doesn't excuse you or any user from violating the AUP/TOS in which you accepted and agreed to.
You also make mention that "It seems that only cable CO's have problem with people using BT." and for that I applaud you... This shouldn't have to be stated to you or anyone in the first place.. Cable is a shared medium and must be managed .. DSL, the slower connection, as you already may know, is a dedicated line to the CO and what you do does not affect others in your neighborhood.
Cable internet has ALWAYS been sold primarily as a residential service for residential type use. That's where I will stop. Anything further is guaranteed to double the current number of messages in this thread. | |
|
| 
Work
@charter.com
 from:
dadkins
| i use BT for alot of things above and beyond piracy.
haev you ever tried to collaborate with other musical artists who're 1400miles away using raw uncompressed audio while trying to build a drum and bass track from the ground up?
ever try to send them that file via a slower transfer method?
Trust me. bittorrent is an effective way to share large files with other people. BT is a tool, much like a gun, a computer or even a dump truck. How someone uses it is entirely seperate from the original purpose.
by your logic, TK, we should 1)ban guns because people use them to kill people, 2)ban computers because people use them to steal other people's identity, and 3) ban dump trucks because people use them to hide dead bodies occasionally.
doesn't make sense to me, but hey, it's your rose colored (or anti-piracy colored, really) glasses. | |
|
| | 
neonhomer
Honoray Mythbuster
Premium
join:2004-01-27
Edgewater, FL
clubs: | Re: hell ya. IIRC, Blizzard Entertainment uses Bittorrent to transfer updates for World of Warcraft... | |
|
| | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: hell ya. .. and since you only download them, you should not be affected by the torrents, right?
Or wait.. is blizzard using the last mile end user to distribute their software in which they are being paid for by the end user? If so, then other "end users" are uploading the files FOR Blizzard. (I know the answer to this and am being obvious about something)
It's not your fault that Blizzard updates are being slowed down.. it's not Comcast or any other ISP's fault.. it's Blizzard's fault for not running their own data centers to upload the patches for you to download.
Blizzard, like any other revenue generating business, should not be distributing their patches on the backs of the ISP's last mile users.. they are collecting money each month from the end user in order to operate their business.
Where is the outrage from the paying users of Blizzard for this shoddy practice in the first place?
Sandvine affects upload streams of BT.. | |
|
| | | | gopnick
join:2005-01-07
Benton, AR | Re: hell ya. Wow, if "that ain't the telco line," I don't know what is.
Do you work for AT&T?
If Blizzard's customers have a problem with it (they clearly do not) they can buy software elsewhere. That's capitalism. | |
|
| | | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: hell ya. Thanks for the laugh.
Your focus is on the wrong area... for one, I'm a former customer.. dropped them for all their BS .. tired of their faulty patches and tired of their inability to put out a maintenance schedule that doesn't work.. tired of them allowing cheats on the system and tired of them taking away resources because of their faulty programming.
Do I work for AT&T? Give me a break.. what a total and complete moronic, stupid, idiotic come back... if you knew anything, or bothered, you'd know else wise. | |
|
| | jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL | That's surprising -- your files are shared and served by that many people? BT isn't really helpful for 1:1 sharing... | |
|
| | | 
SimbaTLK1
Rawrrr
join:2001-09-07
Bethel Park, PA
clubs:
| Re: hell ya. said by jester121 :That's surprising -- your files are shared and served by that many people? BT isn't really helpful for 1:1 sharing... ...I was wondering the same thing :-\
--Matt | |
|
| 
Noah Vail
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by TKJunkMail :said by guhuna :No matter what, pirates are always going to come out on top. And why is that good except for thieves? To which thieves are you referring and why do you choose those particular thieves?
NV
--
Abortion: A Republican Plot to Thin the Liberal Herd. | |
|
| Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| said by TKJunkMail :said by guhuna :No matter what, pirates are always going to come out on top. And why is that good except for thieves? To pirates, I'd agree - its not a good thing. However, for us legal users of BT, this is indeed welcome news. | |
|
| 
root9
join:2005-04-08
Kitchener, ON
| HAHAHA ,, you must be slightly misinformed TK Junk Mail and rest of you RIAA CRIA lovers.
Maybe you'd like to learn who the real thieves are:
Try to google video "Ring of Power" and watch it. All 6 hrs of it. Learn it, let it sink in ,, then maybe get back to us here and post some real comments.
Hint: download the video via BT and spread it around.
Å | |
|
| 
knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| said by TKJunkMail :said by guhuna :No matter what, pirates are always going to come out on top. And why is that good except for thieves? The "thieves" are really a moot point as they can use one of a million other ways to transfer files. You might as well say that "no matter what, smart people are always going to come out on top". I think that would fit better.
I can think of a few reasons just off the top of my head why it's good.
1) Better use of bandwidth when getting public files
2) Redundant setup so that one single failure doesn't take down the entire swarm
3) More research into better managing large file distribution
4) Gives you a better way to manage your network. If BT and all the others weren't under such a witch hunt, it would make it easier for the network admins to manage the traffic by just looking at a specific port or packet type. But now, with all the ISP trouble, they have to resolve to hiding the traffic so that it looks like web surfing, vpn, or e-mail habits instead. It would be wonderful to traffic shape via just a simple port than have to use special hardware to detect what the packets are doing causing more traffic overhead and costing a lot of money to maintain. | |
|
| | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: hell ya. The majority of the traffic is piracy - yet so many people want to ignore that fact and justify it's wonderful uses.
The real bottom line here is that in the end, the "smart people" as is being stated here, that will come out on top will be the ISPs. It's only a matter of time if they can't traffic shape their networks to manage high users that they WILL move to a billing by the byte model.
Then, in that case, .... who really wins? and who loses?
The pirates don't win... the bulk of the end users lose when their bills go through the roof thanks to the smug piracy fighters.
These people fighting this BT battle are not doing anyone, including themselves, any favors. | |
|
| | | bunklung
join:2002-07-13
Northampton, MA
1 edit | Re: hell ya. said by fiberguy :The majority of the traffic is piracy - yet so many people want to ignore that fact and justify it's wonderful uses. The real bottom line here is that in the end, the "smart people" as is being stated here, that will come out on top will be the ISPs. It's only a matter of time if they can't traffic shape their networks to manage high users that they WILL move to a billing by the byte model. Then, in that case, .... who really wins? and who loses? The pirates don't win... the bulk of the end users lose when their bills go through the roof thanks to the smug piracy fighters. These people fighting this BT battle are not doing anyone, including themselves, any favors. I'm a bit more optimistic. I think the ISPs (cable) that have the inability to grow their networks to meet the bandwidth needs (this could be a technical reason or financial, or both) will suffer in the end.
I think Verizon will take the opportunity to eat cable's lunch if they are officially outed by the FCC on sandvine. This is regardless if the FCC does anything about it. High speed internet, where competition is available, is highly competitive. I can see the ads now... "DSL and Fios has no caps. We do not charge you for overages and we do not throttle you. It's pure fiber, unlimited. Comcast and cable TV however, has invisible caps and throttles your bandwidth!". The ad will follow up with quotes from the FCC report.
Now, that doesn't mean Verizon will do exactly what you say and use it as a money grab too, but I really think that want users to grab the perception that fios an dsl is much better than cable.
Cable internet has had the perception that it's so much faster than DSL and a much better product. I think their advertised rates are finally catching up to the pain of real world use.
Also, if BT went away right this second, the bandwidth needs continue to grow.
Long ago will be the days when mom and pops point and click their way through thier e-mail and check the news on cnn. The killer apps will move/force the ISPs to grow.
Secondly, I don't think for a second the move to tiered caps is just because they can't handle BT, it's because cable is threatened by other forms of digital distribution, like Apple TV and Netflix online.
Would you agree that Apple TV and Netflix are getting a free ride on the ISPs just like Blizzard does on their distribution model?
*edit for spelling* | |
|
| | | | 
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
2 edits | Re: hell ya. said by bunklung :
Secondly, I don't think for a second the move to tiered caps is just because they can't handle BT, it's because cable is threated by other forms of digital distribution, like Apple TV and Netflix online.
Would you agree that Apple TV and Netflix are getting a free ride on the ISPs just like Blizzard does on their distribution model?
Cable will have no problem handling very large bandwidth growth downstream. It is only the stress that P2P puts on upstream that is the issue. So, no I don't think Netflix and Apple TV are problems.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
|
| | | | | bunklung
join:2002-07-13
Northampton, MA
| Re: hell ya. said by TKJunkMail :said by bunklung :
Secondly, I don't think for a second the move to tiered caps is just because they can't handle BT, it's because cable is threated by other forms of digital distribution, like Apple TV and Netflix online.
Would you agree that Apple TV and Netflix are getting a free ride on the ISPs just like Blizzard does on their distribution model?
Cable will have no problem handling very large bandwidth growth downstream. It is only the stress that P2P puts on upstream that is the issue. So, no I don't think Netflix and Apple TV are problems. I'd like to reiterate my point. Netflix and Apple TV are a problem, since it's competition to their services, re: VOD.
Tiered service fixes all those pesky problems.
They will continue to advertise high speeds beyond what they can sustain. Yes, cable will have no problem handling very large bandwidth growth downstream, but that comes at a cost. It's an expense they would rather not pay for a technology that has it's limitations. | |
|
| 
slimpickinz
join:2003-11-29
Conyers, GA
2 edits | you obviously have never used the technology or you would not cry out "Thief" every time this subject is mentioned.
Get a friggin' grip. | |
|
| |
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | i dont think BT should be throttlable, i dont want my WoW patches slowed down when big patches come out.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
| fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: hell ya. said by Kearnstd :i dont think BT should be throttlable, i dont want my WoW patches slowed down when big patches come out. Then write WOW and ask them to operate a legitimate data center. After all, you are paying a monthly fee for the service. That should also include WOW running a datea center of their own. | |
|
| | 
elios
join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO
·Mediacom
| Re: hell ya. right do you have any idea how much bandwidth that would take come a big patch some are over 400MB
that x a few million all trying to get it at once
one would be lucky to get 10-20KB/s
they picked BT becouse its bandwidth scales with the users on the network the more sharing the faster the patch
btw bliz DOES seed the patches out of there data centers this just takes the load off of them on big patch days
/youfail | |
|
| | |
See 18 replies to this post |
|
| | Ikarasu
join:2004-01-09
Port Coquitlam, BC
 ·ITalkBB
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| Are you saying Bittorent isnt legit?
WoW has over 10 million customers. Putting costs aside(since blizz is obviously pretty financially stable) Do you know the work/time involved in distributing a 300 MB patch to 10 million people at once?
sure, not all 10 million download at the exact same time, but a huge portion of them do. It's near impossible to be able to achieve that throughput.
Bit torrent was made to get files out to multi users as fast as possible. Blizzard is taking this new technology, and putting it to practice - And guess what? It works.
Theres no forum posts about patches downloading too slow, no queue/wait times to download patches like many MMOs have, no free hosting sites like filehost or other gaming patch sites.
WoW is putting new technology to use. Bittorent is NOT a problem, more internet developed companies dont seem to mind it at all, infact some endorse it. If USA/Canadas internet wasn't in the state it is, it wouldn't affect other subscribers either.
If comcast spent some of the billions it made to make their pipes larger, or adopt the many new diff cable standards out there, and increase their capacity... Bittorent wouldn't be a problem for them either.
So using your logic, The people who pay Comcast a monthly fee, should be able to use their ADVERTISED speeds, and ADVERTISED bandwidth for the actual subscription they're paying for.
People pay comcast specifically to access the Internet - They have imposed limits and speeds, and as long as people adhere to them, I don't see why they have a right to limit what you can/cant do on their network, as long as it's legal.
Blizzard doesn't announce that they have direct downloads, nor do they hide the fact they use Bittorent. It's as great technology, and I'm glad they put it to use. | |
|
|
|
|
·