dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
46

mattei
Moderated, now muzzled
join:2001-03-19
Canada

mattei to Matt3

Member

to Matt3

Re: I'm tired of ISPs implying usage = pirate

It doesn't.
  • The article, as a whole, implies abuse by a few.
  • The majority of releases I've seen from Marie on this subject do.
  • CSRs do.
  • Employees roving these forums do (not all).
  • Ignorant members with no hard data do.
After reading about this for a while, I suppose I made the erroneous assumption that everyone had received the "abuser" = pirate/criminal memo. If you disagree with my assessment of the tone I'd like to hear your take on it.

The spin begins: »Re: Great article
psx_defector
join:2001-06-09
Allen, TX

2 recommendations

psx_defector

Member

said by mattei:

  • The article, as a whole, implies abuse by a few.
It's called a bell curve. The outliers at the top of the graph suck down bandwidth like there is no tomorrow, while grandma is sitting there at the other end pulling up their genealogy websites once a month. A deviation shift to the left will release so much bandwidth, it's worth it for companies to do it.
  • The majority of releases I've seen from Marie on this subject do.
  • CSRs do.
  • Employees roving these forums do (not all).
  • Ignorant members with no hard data do.After reading about this for a while, I suppose I made the erroneous assumption that everyone had received the "abuser" = pirate/criminal memo. If you disagree with my assessment of the tone I'd like to hear your take on it.
  • Could it be because it's true? Or do you slurp down terabytes of "Linux ISOs"?

    A quick search through torrent search engines, eD2K networks, and Usenet will show the VAST majority of the content to be of dubious merits or pr0n.

    But, oh, you only get "Linux ISOs" and "patches" that way right?

    Don't pretend like pirates are not a large part of the problem. They consume WAY more bandwidth than any family watching Hulu 24x7.

    FFH5
    Premium Member
    join:2002-03-03
    Tavistock NJ

    FFH5

    Premium Member

    said by psx_defector:

    But, oh, you only get "Linux ISOs" and "patches" that way right?

    Don't pretend like pirates are not a large part of the problem.
    Like when the Swedes passed a tougher anti-piracy law, traffic went down 33%. It must have been all those Linux distros that were no longer downloaded.

    Couldn't have been a 33% drop because of pirates downloading less.{/sarcasm}

    Ignite
    Premium Member
    join:2004-03-18
    UK

    1 recommendation

    Ignite

    Premium Member

    said by FFH5:

    Like when the Swedes passed a tougher anti-piracy law, traffic went down 33%. It must have been all those Linux distros that were no longer downloaded.

    Couldn't have been a 33% drop because of pirates downloading less.{/sarcasm}
    Most of that traffic drop was actually upstream. Socialist Sweden is nice like that, good upstreams on the socialist symmetrical fibre to the home services delivered over the socialist fibre belonging to the socialised local utilities.

    Matt3
    All noise, no signal.
    Premium Member
    join:2003-07-20
    Jamestown, NC

    1 recommendation

    Matt3 to FFH5

    Premium Member

    to FFH5
    Click for full size
    Oh look, it's the bandwidth hogs ... not
    said by FFH5:

    said by psx_defector:

    But, oh, you only get "Linux ISOs" and "patches" that way right?

    Don't pretend like pirates are not a large part of the problem.
    Like when the Swedes passed a tougher anti-piracy law, traffic went down 33%. It must have been all those Linux distros that were no longer downloaded.

    Couldn't have been a 33% drop because of pirates downloading less.{/sarcasm}
    Like Ignite said, it was actually on the upstream side.

    I love how thieves, I mean Linux ISO downloaders, say they are DOWNLOADING Linux ISOs or Microsoft patches or watching videos (or insert latest craze) but fail utterly at logic when they post their monthly stats of 250GB uploaded and 300GB downloaded. Aside from illegal content (read: music, movies, and programs/games) there isn't enough legal content for someone to upload 250GB a month, consistently.

    In the meantime, join a popular torrent swarm, say CentOS or Ubuntu. There are never more than a few hundred people in there. See the screenshot I posted ... and CentOS 5.3 was released pretty recently.

    andyb
    Premium Member
    join:2003-05-29
    SW Ontario

    1 edit

    andyb to psx_defector

    Premium Member

    to psx_defector
    said by psx_defector:

    said by mattei:

    • The article, as a whole, implies abuse by a few.
    It's called a bell curve. The outliers at the top of the graph suck down bandwidth like there is no tomorrow, while grandma is sitting there at the other end pulling up their genealogy websites once a month. A deviation shift to the left will release so much bandwidth, it's worth it for companies to do it.
  • The majority of releases I've seen from Marie on this subject do.
  • CSRs do.
  • Employees roving these forums do (not all).
  • Ignorant members with no hard data do.After reading about this for a while, I suppose I made the erroneous assumption that everyone had received the "abuser" = pirate/criminal memo. If you disagree with my assessment of the tone I'd like to hear your take on it.
  • Could it be because it's true? Or do you slurp down terabytes of "Linux ISOs"?

    A quick search through torrent search engines, eD2K networks, and Usenet will show the VAST majority of the content to be of dubious merits or pr0n.

    But, oh, you only get "Linux ISOs" and "patches" that way right?

    Don't pretend like pirates are not a large part of the problem. They consume WAY more bandwidth than any family watching Hulu 24x7.
    Why are you assuming this has anything to do with pirates.Bandwidth has done nothing but gone down in costs for years making ISP's even more money.
    said by urbanriot:

    I agree with the above post, if they wanted to relieve congestion they could offer and advertised unmetered evening billing. Anyone savvy enough to download large amounts of data is more than likely savvy enough to schedule downloads during this time, and it would give Cogeco a more balanced usage model.
    According to bell Canada ther is no congestion during the day but only at night from 4:30 to to 2:22am.Pretty much covers anytime anyone is home.Since business run on these same lines during the day at higher volumes I dont see how that is posible.With Cogeco its either they don't wanna upgrade or want more money.I know both answers are they want more money but they are gonna be in for a treat real soon with a revolt.People I talked to people who are fed up with rates doubled in 5 years and service degraded across all ISP's and thier other services and they are ready to make thier voices heard.MP?MPP's better be aware.Your neck's are on the line.

    mattei
    Moderated, now muzzled
    join:2001-03-19
    Canada

    mattei to psx_defector

    Member

    to psx_defector
    said by psx_defector:

    It's called a bell curve.
    Did you understand the Bell Wireline numbers?
    said by psx_defector:

    The outliers at the top of the graph suck down bandwidth like there is no tomorrow, while grandma is sitting there at the other end pulling up their genealogy websites once a month.
    Thanks for the math refresher. They're called tiered service offerings. Ask Krispy or check out the packages.
    said by psx_defector:

    A deviation shift to the left will release so much bandwidth, it's worth it for companies to do it.
    Standard deviation of normally distributed bell curves plotting monthly GB consumption? It's shrinking. Let me help you with that: the slope is steeper and the curve is narrower. "Shifting" won't do as much as it used to.
    said by psx_defector:

    Could it be because it's true?
    Are you in possession of data that will prove it, one way or another?
    said by psx_defector:

    Or do you slurp down terabytes of "Linux ISOs"?
    Nope.
    said by psx_defector:

    A quick search through torrent search engines, eD2K networks, and Usenet will show the VAST majority of the content to be of dubious merits or pr0n.
    Who's talking about P2P? Cogeco?
    said by Cogeco January 19th CRTC filing :

    Regarding the Upstream side, the introduction of NBAR[Network Based Application Recognition] on Cogeco’s network improved Cogeco’s capacity of recognising P2P applications. As a result, Cogeco’s average enduser monthly usage fell significantly. Since the fall 2007, without any modification to its practice, Cogeco noted that Cogeco’s average end-user monthly usage has decreased. This change is mainly attributed to the fact that customers are using more online video, such as You Tube, and therefore are likely to use less P2P applications.
    Do you need help with DOCSIS upstream QPSK or 16-QAM concepts and considerations?
    said by psx_defector:

    But, oh, you only get "Linux ISOs" and "patches" that way right?
    I love that you're trying to paint me with that brush. Thanks for providing an example of what I said above.
    said by psx_defector:

    Don't pretend like pirates are not a large part of the problem.
    I don't pretend. I demand proof.
    said by psx_defector:

    They consume WAY more bandwidth than any family watching Hulu 24x7.
    Numbers please.

    otty
    join:2008-10-24
    Revelstoke, BC

    otty

    Member

    The bottom line is whether it is pirated content or not that is being downloaded is of NO concern to the ISP. The obly valid argument they MIGHT have is congestion. IF that were true MAYBE some sort of cap would be justified. The overage prices still wouldn't.

    They provide connectivity. They are not the police or any sort of enforcement agency. It is not their concern what is being downloaded on their network until they receive the subpoena. Even then it is only the info required by the subpoena that is their concern. Until legislated otherwise lets stay on topic:

    Caps...

    beatsnpieces
    join:2007-12-17

    1 edit

    1 recommendation

    beatsnpieces

    Member

    said by otty:

    The bottom line is whether it is pirated content or not that is being downloaded is of NO concern to the ISP.
    That's not strictly true. If you rent out the basement of your house to someone and he uses the space to grow pot would that not be a concern to you? He may be paying rent to be there but he is using YOUR property to do something illegal and you have every right to take action against him.

    The same applies to ISPs and piracy. Like it or not copyright infringement IS illegal, an ISPs network is effectively private property and your monthly bill is like the rent on that property. Just because ISPs choose not to get involved with enforcement doesn't mean they CAN'T.

    KrK
    Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
    Premium Member
    join:2000-01-17
    Tulsa, OK
    Netgear WNDR3700v2
    Zoom 5341J

    KrK to FFH5

    Premium Member

    to FFH5
    said by FFH5:

    Like when the Swedes passed a tougher anti-piracy law, traffic went down 33%.
    Uh, but they switched to proxy and anonymous downloading, so it was just a brief dip while they reconfig'd.

    FFH5
    Premium Member
    join:2002-03-03
    Tavistock NJ

    1 recommendation

    FFH5

    Premium Member

    said by KrK:
    said by FFH5:

    Like when the Swedes passed a tougher anti-piracy law, traffic went down 33%.
    Uh, but they switched to proxy and anonymous downloading, so it was just a brief dip while they reconfig'd.
    But it proved the point that much of broadband traffic is based on illegal piracy.

    badtrip
    Premium Member
    join:2004-03-20

    1 recommendation

    badtrip

    Premium Member

    said by FFH5:

    said by KrK:
    said by FFH5:

    Like when the Swedes passed a tougher anti-piracy law, traffic went down 33%.
    Uh, but they switched to proxy and anonymous downloading, so it was just a brief dip while they reconfig'd.
    But it proved the point that much of broadband traffic is based on illegal piracy.
    Well, no.

    Folks in Sweden saw a new law come into effect and subsequently downloaded less. This 33% reduction in traffic, while likely caused by the harsher anti-piracy law could conceivably be attributed not only to "pirates" but to "regular law abiding folks" unsure about what constitutes "illegal downloading" and may have stopped downloading many legitimate files "just to be safe".

    Now, let's say for the sake of argument that the 33% reduction in traffic was completely composed of "illegal piracy" (and I am highly skeptical of this). Then 33% is much less than the 80% that has been thrown around in the past by many folks on this forum and others.

    Thus, this 33% reduction in traffic has actually proven that the "anti-piracy" shills and idiots overstated the internet traffic attributed to "piracy" by 246%!

    bars
    @91.186.245.x

    bars to beatsnpieces

    Anon

    to beatsnpieces
    because its my house thats why i'll be questioned.
    they cant talk to ISPs about this because they know how the "internet" thingy works. the ISP will give them my ip and my info IF IM DOWNLOADING ILLEGAL STUFF

    nothingworkshere
    @cgocable.net

    nothingworkshere to beatsnpieces

    Anon

    to beatsnpieces
    actually, a landlord doesn't have any legal right to do anything to a tenant, not even enter without notice. what he CAN do is call the cops