dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
30
share rss forum feed
« Don't like it....?
This is a sub-selection from Well


funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6

1 recommendation

reply to jc100

Re: Well

said by jc100:

but truth be told, mobile broadband isn't mean to go p2p galore.
Then call it "Mobile CompuServe" or something. It certainly isn't Internet access.

Mobile broadband might actually be better than cable is for P2P, given the more symmetric nature of wireless signals. We really don't know, since none of the wireless ISPs permit it.

But here's the thing -- the Internet is a multi-purpose network. If there is a technical reason for some of these restrictions, then make the technical limit and let __me__ decide how I want to spend it! I should be able to use P2P if 1. I don't unduly impact anyone else and 2. I stay within the technical limits (speeds and consumption).

The internet wasn't designed for image-rich web pages, and it struggled for a while. We didn't ban them, we evolved.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...

beaups

join:2003-08-11
Hilliard, OH
"If there is a technical reason for some of these restrictions, then make the technical limit and let __me__ decide how I want to spend it"

That would be a CAP and we all know how well received those are.


funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6

2 recommendations

said by beaups:

"If there is a technical reason for some of these restrictions, then make the technical limit and let __me__ decide how I want to spend it"

That would be a CAP and we all know how well received those are.
Caps aren't well received, that's true. But ask yourself -- why? Or what can a provider do with a cap that makes it less ugly?

1. They can promise to raise it faster than demand
2. They can exempt certain hours from the cap
3. They can offer a slower, uncapped service
4. They can offer a "re-buy" of more bandwidth

Most ISPs are being pretty boneheaded about it. Comcast got heat for their "new" cap only because it surprised people who weren't aware that it had been there for years.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...

fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3
reply to funchords
said by funchords:

said by jc100:

but truth be told, mobile broadband isn't mean to go p2p galore.
Then call it "Mobile CompuServe" or something. It certainly isn't Internet access.

It's really sad when you need to get hung up on "terms" because, as you know, one word can and does mean different things in a slight way, or different things all together.

Bank: A place where money is stored, the sides of a river, or to make a motion to turn.

The internet.. honestly, when was it EVER defined as completely 100% wide open access to anything and to use it in anyway you want? So far, I don't think that it has.

The moment we have to de-evolve based on terms or labels rather than reading the actual description (ie: TOS statements) then we have a problem.

The "internet" is what it is.. it's a connection to other resources on it. I don't believe that it said it was completely with out bounds. The fact that many providers block incoming port 80 would, under your terms, disqualify the connection as "internet"... that would include Verizon's, AT&T/SBC's, Comcast, Cox, Charter, DirecWay, Wild Blue, and wow...! ...even Fios!

The definition you seek in which you want to define the internet is in the user agreement and you should read it in its entirety. Since its available online to all users and non-users alike, there is no excuse. I don't think many people here claim to be lawyers either, INCLUDING Karl. However, its odd that so many people claim that language is too hard to understand and its vague, etc. yet, numerous threads have be posted explaining that very 'hard to understand' language that only lawyers can read. Hmmm, maybe there are more lawyers here than we think.. or, maybe it's not too hard to understand and people are either being lazy, or practicing victimization.

Either way.. the internet is what it is and we don't need 20,000 flavor-terms to describe the connections. I DO think however, we need more people to grow up and stop acting like 3 year-old children who cry anytime they don't get it their way. (And with all that, it's a wonder that Burger King isn't doing as well as McDonalds and Taco Bell)

fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3

1 recommendation

reply to funchords
said by funchords:

said by beaups:

"If there is a technical reason for some of these restrictions, then make the technical limit and let __me__ decide how I want to spend it"

That would be a CAP and we all know how well received those are.
Caps aren't well received, that's true. But ask yourself -- why? Or what can a provider do with a cap that makes it less ugly?

1. They can promise to raise it faster than demand
2. They can exempt certain hours from the cap
3. They can offer a slower, uncapped service
4. They can offer a "re-buy" of more bandwidth

Most ISPs are being pretty boneheaded about it. Comcast got heat for their "new" cap only because it surprised people who weren't aware that it had been there for years.
I am 100% sorry to disagree with you. Caps are not well received because they are caps, period. For you, the above may be your reason, but it's not for the majority around here that cry daily about them.

While many people here, power users even, state that they never reach anywhere near 250gb, others cry about the highest caps made public to date. (And they still aren't good enough)

People want unlimited access to the internet for the least amount of money, and I can't even add the word 'possible' to that line. Many people here think the internet should be under $20 a month; I disagree. The word value does mean something in this case.

In the early 2000s, many were still on dial-up. That meant 1 computer on 1 slow line ant 1 time. THAT was $20.00. Today, many people have connections 50x faster and have multiple computers hooked up for that same circa $20.00 per month. (oddly, they claim its too expensive and should be cheaper.. I mean, Its ONLY a 1.5 line )

Comcast, of them all, posted the highest "cap" in the industry and yet people still cry. The reality is that those who are crying have been far exceeding that for a long time and the party is over. Its time to pay if you want to play.

Come up with what ever reason you may want why caps are in place and label that your own reason.. but for gods sake, don't anyone ever put words in my mouth, especially around here, about anything.

Providers CAN in fact do many things - but that's their choice. You can certainly operate your gas station anyway you want - why do you, however, continue to do it the same way as everyone else? Providers, believe it or not, ARE in the business to make money, not break even. Scary fact, but it's NOT always "about the consumer".. it's about survival. In this country, we ALL, including business, have the right to make choices, including going out of business and failing. If they make the right combination of choices, they win.. if they make the wrong ones, they fail. Pure and simple.

Shockingly to some, in the case of Wall-Street, they made the choice to fail.. it's time to let them.. in all cases including broadband, when one fails, another will step in. It's the cycle of life.

beaups

join:2003-08-11
Hilliard, OH
VERY well put. If it makes good business sense for somebody to launch a fast, wide open, cap free network...then I'm sure they will. Think of the competetive advantage a mobile operator would have by advertising the only truly unlimited plan? Why isn't it hapening? Probably doesn't make good business sense. I'm also bothered by these consumer "advocate" groups trying to get the government/fcc to get involved. It seems to be the theme over the past few months "dear government, save me , save me". Let the market decide who wins/loses.


funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6
reply to fiberguy
said by fiberguy:

The internet.. honestly, when was it EVER defined as completely 100% wide open access to anything and to use it in anyway you want? So far, I don't think that it has.
This is a technical industry, and these "terms" have been abused by the players in this industry to trick customers into buying products that are less and different then are described. Are you seriously going to come to me and tell me that companies ought to be able to sell donkeys as race-cars?

I, more than anyone here, have read TOSs and AUPs, and Privacy Policies -- from top to bottom. I did it in the Comcast case, I did it in the NebuAd case -- probably more than 50 different companies both in the USA and abroad. GET BENT with telling me that I should "read my TOS!"

said by fiberguy:

The definition you seek in which you want to define the internet is in the user agreement and you should read it in its entirety. Since its available online to all users and non-users alike, there is no excuse. I don't think many people here claim to be lawyers either, INCLUDING Karl. However, its odd that so many people claim that language is too hard to understand and its vague, etc. yet, numerous threads have be posted explaining that very 'hard to understand' language that only lawyers can read. Hmmm, maybe there are more lawyers here than we think.. or, maybe it's not too hard to understand and people are either being lazy, or practicing victimization.
So what's your argument? You start by saying everyone should read that document, but don't try to interpret it unless we're lawyers, but those that don't try to read it are lazy victims.

You should write TOS documents for a living!
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...

fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3
First off, you can "get bent" with your entire notion..

You, "more than anyone here, have read TOSs and AUPs, and Privacy Policies -- from top to bottom." Yea.. that's not self serving. I guess since I read EVERY piece of paper I am being held to PRIOR to being bound by it, guess you must read it, roll around on it naked, eat it and do other un-mentionables to it as well, huh?

And, while the back end of the "industry" may be "technical" .. the consumer side of it is NOT. You act like some sort of elitist in your approach to the internet. Ask an average person what "transfer" is and they'll likely tell you it's something you use to get from one bus to another, or something like that.

If you knew ANYTHING about terms and how they are used, you'd know that 1) the average person is ignorant to much of their own world and have to be talked to in simplified terms. 2) Advertisements are NOT agreements. GOD oh GOD get that one straight and stop mucking things up to serve your own self centered interests.

I still have YET to see an AUP that is written in suck legaleze that the average person can't understand it. If you can't "get" the TOS / AUP agreements, then you really need to reapt the 5th grade - and fast.

What I said was pretty clear... read the agreement. Don't EVEN try to argue with me on this point as I bet with in 5 minutes of searching this very site, I can find at least a dozen people that claim they won't even bother to read the TOS in the first place.

... funny, isn't it?


funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6
First you accuse me of not reading my TOS (when you knew damn well that I likely had read it) and then you call me "self-serving" for pointing that out.

I'm glad you think that advertisements are meaningless and the customer should just shut up and live with whatever "they" want to graciously give us.

You're a model of your industry.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...

fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3
"my industry"...? Wow! I need to go look in my bank account again and see how much money I have so I can go roll around in it naked. Thanks for reminding me. Seriously, the last time I was involved in these childish "sides" games, I was also learning ABCs and 123s.. IOW, save that game for the children.

Now, where did I accuse you of "not reading" the TOS? If I recall, from just re-reading my own post, AND YOURS, was that after you claimed the industry abuses terms to "trick" an industry.. that argument has been used clearly born from advertisements, NOT the TOS. The TOS statements, if you OR ANYONE, can't understand them, are clearly playing ignorant or selectively choosing not to understand them; who's fault is that?

I love how you follow up my posts and try to twist my words and change the meaning of what I clearly said. Sounds just like what you're claiming the 'Industry' does.. shame on you.

When you sit there and use (quoted) words like "they" and "graciously give us" it comes back like you have some sort of entitlement. The providers are NOT the government that you mistake them for. These are businesses that have a right to offer their services for what they are. Your right to pick it apart is at the TOS that you say you read so clearly and if you ARE reading them, you'd not be here bitching and moaning about it.

The TOS is not written in the so called 'legal-eez'.. the very items people come here, wasting their lives daily, bitching about are pretty clearly written. I'm glad the main cheer leader, Karl, makes you believe it's hard to understand. If this is the case, some people need to find a new cheer-leader because he's failing you just like so many politicians fail their people.

Finally, I don't think advertisements are meaningless.. however, there IS a problem with the customer using them as "agreements" and further, reading into them much farther than intended. I mean, seriously, around here, people have picked apart Time Warner Cable for using the line "the power of you".. WTF? People are worried if TWC uses the word "fiber" in their ad even though its fiber driven. Why does that same crowd defend providers like Qwest for calling their phone service "digital" because of equipment in the CO even though 1,800 feet of cable transmission is still analog to the home where most of the degradation happens?

Many people HERE are self serving and are selectively choosing to pick their battles. Quite frankly, it simply shows the mentality of many in this country, and its sickening.

Advertisements are just that.. they get you interested in the product. While I do not condone false advertising and SOME merchants out there step on that line, many of the ads being picked apart here by some of you so-called freedom fighters are anything but false. It's those who put some notion that an ad is a user-agreement that get me. It's the very same crowd that admits there IS a TOS agreement and then discloses that they don't read them for a reason that isn't even valid. Besides, if you feel you need an attorney to read or decipher one, then by all means, HIRE ONE! It's your right, and no one is stopping you.. it's surely no excuse not to at least read one.

Now, to put THIS argument to rest, instead of baseless claims, PLEASE by all means, go grab your comcast or favorite hated companies TOS agreement, post it in its entirety and BY ALL MEANS, state exactly what is in the thing that you can't understand and why.. until then, its all baseless blabber.


funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6
The definition you seek in which you want to define the internet is in the user agreement and you should read it in its entirety.
The last part of this is what set me off. You and I can disagree on the first part, but -- c'mon -- I'm not the lazy, uninformed person you lumped me in with.

fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3

1 edit
I also often use the word "you" as in "some may" etc.

However, when I made that comment, I was referring to the difference between people who use an advertisement as their TOS agreement.

From accounts I read here all the time, I think people are smarter than they play on this site. Rather, they chose to play ignorant at times in order to attempt to establish a point.

Do I think you're stupid? By all means, no. I read and follow your posts much more than many others. We may not always agree on everything; believe it or not, I agree with you more times than not, however, I just do believe that some people's 'wants' here skew the reality of what's behind getting to them.

As I was basically saying is that we all know that an ad is just an ad. (Yes, there is a line that can be crossed) however, people still hold on to the "unlimited access" term which went away years ago.. and people are picking at the "up-to" term a lot, too. (which is explained in the TOS, and as I said, SOME (excuse me) people chose not to read, and even admit it)

-peace


funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6
peace and thanks.