| reply to pandora
Re: 250GB sounds low people on this website wanted an actual cap. well they have one ready to be put in place. So you can blame everyone on here for wanting it in writing. |
|
 GlobalMindDomino Dude, POWER Systems GuyPremium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL | said by hottboiinnc:people on this website wanted an actual cap. well they have one ready to be put in place. So you can blame everyone on here for wanting it in writing. Well that's misstating a bit.
People here weren't looking for a cap per se. What they wanted was for Comcast (or any other ISP for that matter) to disclose the number they believe was too high a consumption.
Basically if they're going to send subs letters saying subs are hogs, the ISP has an obligation to tell you what the heck that means, and also to provide some kind of meter so you know where you are.
Limits without disclosure is crap.
--
TheGlobalMind.com | Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? | Trust the instinct to the end, though you can render no reason. Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
 SLDPremium
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA | reply to hottboiinnc
I never wanted a cap! |
|
 wings10I Am LegendPremium
join:2004-06-09
South Elgin, IL
 ·AT&T DSL Service
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·Dish Network
| reply to GlobalMind
said by GlobalMind:said by hottboiinnc:people on this website wanted an actual cap. well they have one ready to be put in place. So you can blame everyone on here for wanting it in writing. Well that's misstating a bit. People here weren't looking for a cap per se. What they wanted was for Comcast (or any other ISP for that matter) to disclose the number they believe was too high a consumption. Basically if they're going to send subs letters saying subs are hogs, the ISP has an obligation to tell you what the heck that means, and also to provide some kind of meter so you know where you are. Limits without disclosure is crap. Well now you know. It is 250GB. If your downloading that much your doing something illegal IMO.
--
"The American Indians found out what happens when you don't control immigration." |
|
 DanHoModerhatedPremium
join:2002-05-20
Seattle, WA | said by wings10:If your downloading that much your doing something illegal IMO. Well that is just plain stupid. Between my Xbox 360 and Wii (downloading demos, tv shows, movies), VOIP, DirecTV on Demand, and Netflix streaming I can easily get over 250GB a month. Do you see me doing anything illegal in any of those things?
--
Over-moderation at its finest... |
|
| reply to wings10
said by wings10:said by GlobalMind:said by hottboiinnc:people on this website wanted an actual cap. well they have one ready to be put in place. So you can blame everyone on here for wanting it in writing. Well that's misstating a bit. People here weren't looking for a cap per se. What they wanted was for Comcast (or any other ISP for that matter) to disclose the number they believe was too high a consumption. Basically if they're going to send subs letters saying subs are hogs, the ISP has an obligation to tell you what the heck that means, and also to provide some kind of meter so you know where you are. Limits without disclosure is crap. Well now you know. It is 250GB. If your downloading that much your doing something illegal IMO. Your opinion is wrong. I exceeded that because their service didn't work right, kept timing out, and caused files to not completed their downloads, so sometimes it took several attempts to download 1 (large) file. Oh and I'm not the only user in this house either. There was ZERO P2P going on here. ALL files are found in the public domain.
Yes, I downloaded a lot of large files, but everything was on the up and up.
Just because YOU don't use that much, it is very wrong for you to assume that those who do are doing something illegal. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| reply to hottboiinnc
First, I think it's great that Comcast is going to implement this. It's a step forward and the company will finally be ethical instead of practicing the "selective enforcement" they do now.
On the other hand, people are misunderstanding this because it's all rumor for now and has not yet been implemented. Until it is, I (and hopefully everyone else) will keep spreading as much bad publicity as possible to get Comcast to treat its users fairly. |
|
| reply to DanHo
Regardless of whether or not what you're doing is illegal, you're still causing the same amount of congestion on Comcast's network as someone who downloads 250GB of illegal content per month. |
|
GlobalMindDomino Dude, POWER Systems GuyPremium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL
1 edit | reply to wings10
said by wings10 :
Well now you know. It is 250GB. If your downloading that much your doing something illegal IMO. LOL well you are entitled to that opinion.
But that's not the point anyway. The thing was placing limits on the service while saying they weren't, and then refusing to say what the limit was that would get you booted.
The actual content isn't the point either, and your opinion on that piece is pretty funny.
--
TheGlobalMind.com | Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? | Trust the instinct to the end, though you can render no reason. Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
| reply to hottboiinnc
Nobody said they wanted a cap. What people wanted was an honest answer as what too much is too much. |
|
|
|
quatrixPremium
join:2005-02-11
Davie, FL
kudos:2 | reply to DanHo
You're in the minority. My guess is that at least 90% of people who exceed 250 GB are doing something they shouldn't. |
|
DanHoModerhatedPremium
join:2002-05-20
Seattle, WA | And 90% of statistics can be made to say whatever you want when you don't have any data to back it up. /sarcasm
--
Over-moderation at its finest... |
|
 TransitManPremium,MVM
join:2000-09-05
Dayton, OH
kudos:1
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to quatrix
said by quatrix:You're in the minority. My guess is that at least 90% of people who exceed 250 GB are doing something they shouldn't. You might want to rethink this line.
It should actually be 5% -10%, if that, of those who exceed the 250GB cap are doing something illegal. The rest of folks who do, might, may or will exceed that limit would be like the poster DanHo  , who may have 4 or more people online gaming, watching YouTube, watching Hulu, Veoh, or other online legal activity.
Sometimes one has to think on how many in a family are online and using it legally before bitching about caps, limits and the like.
And the ISP's need to rethink the caps very hard. They're assuming (not a good thing as it makes an ass out of you and me) that a family actively online would be able to live with caps lower than 250GB (TWC's 5GB - 40GB caps). Someone in the Glass House on the Glass Throne is not seeing the real world as it is today, but is seeing the world as it once was under all the archaic limits and high usage fees that have gone the way of the doo-doo bird of yesteryear. They're thinking that the consumer will roll over and pay through the nose just because. Guess again!!
--
PROUD TO BE THE DIRECTOR OF THE CRUNCHENSTEIN ASSOCIATION AND THE HOST OF CRUNCHENSTEIN #2 |
|
| reply to wings10
quote:
Well now you know. It is 250GB. If your downloading that much your doing something illegal IMO.
In your opinion, how much do you have to use to be doing something illegal? 20 gigs? 50 gigs? 175 gigs? How much do you use per month? |
|
EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | reply to FoodForThought
No, because if you time your large downloads right and do them in the off-peak time, you can avoid congesting Comcast's network. Note that general caps would hit either way- even the satellite FAP systems loosen up in the middle of the night when bandwidth is least used. |
|
| reply to quatrix
said by quatrix:You're in the minority. My guess is that at least 90% of people who exceed 250 GB are doing something they shouldn't. And how does this one sound -- sorry, I'm in a wierd mood --
"At least 90% of the people who exceed 70MPH on the highway are doing something they shouldn't."
It's about exceeding 250 gigs, right?
ANYONE who drives faster than 70 (except police, fire trucks, ambulances, etc...) is doing something illegal. Right?
So, therefore, everyone who exceeds 250 gigs is doing something wrong (insofar as they are exceeding 250 gigs).
See, it's so beautiful -- Everyone/anyone who exceeds 250 gigs is doing something wrong. It's 100%, not 90%.
I think it's beautiful. |
|
| reply to wings10
you can hit this with streaming media easily, like hd screams on hulu.com or most network websites. |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | reply to DanHo
Are you doing anything illegal? no.. not at all, but, what you are doing, like others, is joining in a mistake, at this time. The internet is NOT a tv connection. While some are offering services to make it so, ..doesn't.
The internet is not ready to have all this stuff tossed it's way. We have satellite, cable, and phone offerings for video right now. People who want to turn the internet into a video stream as a form of cable are going to learn the hard way that it's not the way to go.
And, still, DirecTV on Demand.. what a joke of a service.. If DirecTV wants to offer a so called OnDemand, they should never have gotten out of the data business in the first place.. instead, they are doing exactly what SBC was screaming about... getting rich off the backs of the ISPs.
This move to cap was only inevitable. |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | reply to SLD
Someone else said, too, no one asked for caps.. but to know what they are/were. Well, by asking what the cap is, sets one.
Another user stated that the end user wasn't the reason caps are being put in place.. with out users, there are no caps.
Caps suck, but so do the people that push the limits, thus, the hands of the ISPs to battle them... and here come caps. |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | reply to TIGERON
said by TIGERON:Nobody said they wanted a cap. What people wanted was an honest answer as what too much is too much. What do you think that gets? ... a cap. If you find out what the cap is, it must be enforced. If not, and it was lose, you'd see lawsuits flying that they weren't enforcing caps fairly. |
|
