fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to gopnick
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. |
|
bunklung
join:2002-07-13
Northampton, MA
| reply to TKJunkMail
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. |
|
zachary1
you talkin' to me?
join:2004-03-07
right here | reply to raduque
Freedom would include freedom to obey, or break, any law. |
|
SimbaTLK1
Rawrrr
join:2001-09-07
Bethel Park, PA
clubs:
| reply to jester121
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 |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
2 edits | reply to bunklung
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
1 edit | reply to fiberguy
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* |
|
jtorre69
join:2005-12-26
Hollywood, FL
| reply to 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.
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". |
|
gopnick
join:2005-01-07
Benton, AR | reply to fiberguy
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. |
|
james
join:2001-02-26
antarctica
| reply to jester121
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  . |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to knightmb
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. |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to neonhomer
.. 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.. |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to guhuna
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. |
|
jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL | reply to Work
That's surprising -- your files are shared and served by that many people? BT isn't really helpful for 1:1 sharing... |
|
jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL | reply to james
Good thing there's no pirated software available as .torrents... 
It's not just about music and movies. |
|
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
1 edit | reply to james
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!!! |
|
raduque
join:2006-07-03
Corpus Christi, TX
| reply to james
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. |
|
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
·Comcast
| reply to james
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.... |
|
slimpickinz
join:2003-11-29
Conyers, GA
2 edits |  reply to TKJunkMail
TK Junk Mail....
you obviously have never used the technology or you would not cry out "Thief" every time this subject is mentioned.
Get a friggin' grip. |
|
knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: hell ya.
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. |
|
