 RallyBah HumbugPremium
join:2000-10-27
Astoria, NY
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| Is it that hard To boot the 'heavy' users, who some how cause mass congestion on various cable networks? Why do they keep these type of users, if they're causing all these problems.
I've said it in many other posts, the cable co's had ample time to prepare/install/configure a network, that would handle all the loads/users. But for some reason, they just kept on taking in all those profits, while technology was passing them by.
it's all just a sham. |
|
|
|
| said by Rally:I've said it in many other posts, the cable co's had ample time to prepare/install/configure a network, that would handle all the loads/users. But for some reason, they just kept on taking in all those profits, while technology was passing them by. it's all just a sham. Well in Comcraps case, you're partially right; they've had ample time to build their networks. But unfortunately, they're at the mercy of their shareholders. Since they're at $18.50 now, I can't see a big infusion of cash for their infrastucture any time soon!
How Comcraptic |
|
| reply to Rally
Well if you are a cable monopoly it wouldn't be smart to boot someone for not breaking any advertised or pre-defined rule. Banning someone from the only source of broadband in their town for breaking a rule such as "Using enough bandwidth to adversely effect the network is prohibited", is just asking to be sued and to lose.
If they quietly throttle the speeds they still get the customer's money and the odds of him suing are much lower since he still can do all the legal things he enjoys and knows you are the only ISP he has. And if he did sue, it is very hard for him to prove you are throttling. |
|
 extreme50Formerly TwoKDialupPremium
join:2002-06-07
Coloma, MI | P2P software effectively turns your pc into a public server.
Like it or not, Comcast's TOS explicitly prohibits public servers.
Is that so hard to understand?
--
Comcast has spoiled me rotten! |
|
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | That's sad..
DSL-Extreme specifically allows public servers, with the exception of an open mail relay.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
RallyBah HumbugPremium
join:2000-10-27
Astoria, NY Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to S_engineer
said by S_engineer:said by Rally:I've said it in many other posts, the cable co's had ample time to prepare/install/configure a network, that would handle all the loads/users. But for some reason, they just kept on taking in all those profits, while technology was passing them by. it's all just a sham. Well in Comcraps case, you're partially right; they've had ample time to build their networks. But unfortunately, they're at the mercy of their shareholders. Since they're at $18.50 now, I can't see a big infusion of cash for their infrastucture any time soon! How Comcraptic Yes they're always at the fate of their shareholders! But they also could fix this underlying issue very easily, the problem is. Do they want to spend the type of money Verizon has with its FIOS product. |
|
zipjay
join:2003-03-11
South Williamson, KY | reply to extreme50
until you turn off sharing, then its not |
|
EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | reply to S_engineer
The Roberts family controls the voting stock of Comcast, doesn't it? Or was that arrangement changed? |
|
1 edit | reply to Rally
said by Rally:To boot the 'heavy' users, who some how cause mass congestion on various cable networks? Why do they keep these type of users, if they're causing all these problems. Come on people have got to be able to see the answer to this question. 1.) Boot the (small number) of heavy users (that can cripple a network ) and the problem is solved. No reason for anything to change. 2.) Complain about the (small number) of heavy user (that can cripple a network ) and cap everyone coupled with a price increase. BIG MONEY FOR DOING LESS. Which path do you think they will try to sell to end users. All the while using one of the oldest tactics to get what they want no mater how evil or wrong it is. Convince the majority of the people to hate and despise a minority of the people all the while pumping up the majority as being better than the minority (who is labeled as taking or harming the majority in some way.)
The big ISP's are banking on this tactic working so they can charge each and everyone of us more for less. If they get this to work they will leave it in place as long as they can charging as many generations more for less until people are willing to see "a house divided is doomed to fail." If any of you can not see it, we the end users are the house. Is it to much to hope we will not be manipulated into things like this? Remember if we let AT&T buy Bellsouth it will be better for the customer. AT&T is now talking about caps. Could someone explain to me how these customers getting less than they get now is going to be better for them?
Does that answer your question as to why they keep those users? They can charge more for less if they divide the people. |
|
| reply to extreme50
p2p isn't really a public server. Otherwise uploading anything to someone else is the same as a public server. And most services you run have some kind of registration, making them not public, but private. Even if the registration is simply providing a username when you login, the service is now privatized. Would a webserver with a password be a public server? If so that TOS is basically hogwash. |
|
