how-to block ads
|
|  
Phoenix Gold
Hypocrite
join:2001-11-24
Faulkton, SD
clubs: | Re: Not a suprise I'd make sure i wasn't a customer of your ISP. | |
| | 
Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI | Re: Not a suprise said by bremerton:
I'd make sure i wasn't a customer of your ISP.
Did you even read the article? :P
--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net | |
| | |
Phoenix Gold
Hypocrite
join:2001-11-24
Faulkton, SD
clubs: | Re: Not a suprise yea, i read it. My point was that given a choice in a free market i wouldnt choose your service, or any service that did this. | |
| | | | 
Hayward
K A R - 1 2 0 C
Premium
join:2000-07-13
Key West, FL
| Re: Not a suprise So what are you going to do when the gluttonous warez/mp3 thieves force ALL ISP's to do it to some degree legally and economically... start and fund your own ISP?
Things don't moderate very soon... it will happen one way or another.
--
»haywardm.com (Hayward's Key West)
Terminology or acronyms have you confused?? Use Glossary tool at upper left/mid of page. | |
| | | | |
Phoenix Gold
Hypocrite
join:2001-11-24
Faulkton, SD
clubs:
| Re: Not a suprise "So what are you going to do when the gluttonous warez/mp3 thieves force ALL ISP's to do it to some degree legally and economically... start and fund your own ISP?"
I pay $260 a month for my DSL, its safe to say i would switch providers if they started blocking ports on my service. Im paying for my fair share of BW already, if they start trying to tell me what i can do with it then i wont give them my $.
And maybe if the MPAA and RIAA spent a little time trying to find a way for me to get content in the manner i prefer, they would get some of my money every month. But as things are now they dont even have a product to offer me, let alone one that compares to the ones that are free.
[text was edited by author 2002-04-18 01:47:32] | |
| | | | | |
Hayward
K A R - 1 2 0 C
Premium
join:2000-07-13
Key West, FL
| Re: Not a suprise Well sounds like you are on a business class connection which is a whole other story where you are paying for large bandwidth use.... the MAJORITY are paying just $49 for a residential service which is designed for on demand use... not the 24/7 full bore file transfering that all too many do.
--
»haywardm.com (Hayward's Key West)
Terminology or acronyms have you confused?? Use Glossary tool at upper left/mid of page. | |
| | | | | | | dyehard$
join:2002-02-17
Phoenixville, PA | Re: Not a suprise (( the MAJORITY are paying just $49 for a residential service which is designed for on demand use... not the 24/7 full bore file transfering that all too many do.)))
allways on meens we can have it on 24 7 if we want so there | |
| | | | | | | |
Hayward
K A R - 1 2 0 C
Premium
join:2000-07-13
Key West, FL
| Re: Not a suprise Always on in no way means always full bore... just means it is always available for use on demand without connection. (Though with PPPoE that is not really the case often)
Of course if you all WANT to have FORCED limits imposed just keep it up. Personally I would rather see moderation, and things staying at a reasonable price, without limitation for the OCCASIONAL power use.
I certainly will be PO'd about a price rise that essentially forces everyone to subsidize the gluttony of a few.
--
»haywardm.com (Hayward's Key West)
Terminology or acronyms have you confused?? Use Glossary tool at upper left/mid of page. | |
| 
NOVA_Guy
Obama- Commander in Thief
Premium
join:2002-03-05
 ·VOIPo
| said by Nightfall:
I make sure P2P file sharing, and other bandwidth intensive apps are banned/blocked on my network here at work. I would do the same thing if I worked at that ISP.
Let's differentiate between work and home use Internet for a moment. I certainly have no problem banning access to P2P file sharing services at work, as it:
(1) Is company-paid and supplied bandwidth, giving them the right to ultimately control what it is used for, and
(2) Isn't job-related or productive use of the Internet connection.
It's a cost-saving measure to some extent, and I really don't think it's necessary to download MP3s all day at work. Heck, that's not what I'm being paid for.
Now, on the other hand, when I the user am paying an ISP my hard-earned money for service, I expect to be able to determine what I do and don't do. I've paid for bandwidth and service; that's how my DSL line was sold to me. Telling me I can't use file sharing applications on my home connection is tantamount to telling me I can't start a VPN session to access my computer at work, telling me I can't connect to an FTP server to download a document, and telling me I can't run an email server on my home network.
Assuming that other ISPs were available in my area, I certainly wouldn't choose one that blocked my ability to do anything on the Internet, even if I had to pay more money.
And I disagree with placing caps on how much data can be downloaded per month too. The service I buy already has a certain speed it's capped at; if the ISP is unwilling/unable to support people using an all-you-can-grab connection at those speeds, they should either close their doors or upgrade their network. (Again, I have no problem putting my money where my mouth is)
Hopefully not all ISPs will implement download amount caps. While I'm far from one of the "vampires" mentioned in the article, I still use the Internet on a daily basis from home. And I still download files, sometimes large ones. And I use my DSL connection for full-screen remote control of office computers once I've connected to work through their VPN resources. I don't know how much data is transferred as a result of my being connected to the Internet 24/7, and I don't want to keep track of it either. And I'm willing to pay for this luxury.
--
"Objects in the rear view mirror may appear closer than they are." - Meat Loaf, Bat out of Hell II | |
| |
Hayward
K A R - 1 2 0 C
Premium
join:2000-07-13
Key West, FL
| Re: Not a suprise said by clrankin:
if the ISP is unwilling/unable to support people using an all-you-can-grab connection at those speeds, they should either close their doors or upgrade their network.
Interesting the third OBVIOUS thing isn't there... that bandwidth hogs actually PAY their way, rather than the "normal moderate users" the services are designed and priced for, subsidizing the hogs, or being penalized because of the hogs behavior.
--
»haywardm.com (Hayward's Key West)
Terminology or acronyms have you confused?? Use Glossary tool at upper left/mid of page. | |
| | 
alanhdsl
Premium
join:1999-10-09
Phoenix, AZ
 ·Qwest.net
| said by clrankin:
And I disagree with placing caps on how much data can be downloaded per month too. The service I buy already has a certain speed it's capped at; if the ISP is unwilling/unable to support people using an all-you-can-grab connection at those speeds, they should either close their doors or upgrade their network. (Again, I have no problem putting my money where my mouth is)
I guess the key question is, how much are you willing to pay for a premium service? I'm sure New Zealand Telecom would be delighted if you bought them a trans-Pacific OC-192.
ISPs usually structure their prices based on average usage, but they've discovered a handful of users are way outside that. So they either spread the costs to everyone, or they just ding those using the bandwidth. | |
| 
roamer1
sticking it out at you
join:2001-03-24
Atlanta, GA
clubs:
| Corporate networks are one thing (most block much more than just P2P); we're talking about an ISP blocking its paying customers from using P2P apps. This is no different than cable and ILEC-owned DSL providers disallowing servers (most independent ISPs don't care), C*x and C*mc*st blocking VPN, even if noncommercial, on "residential" service, etc. -- policies with which which I completely disagree, especially if customers are paying by bandwidth used instead of a flat rate, or are subject to bandwidth caps.
Also, more than likely there's something in NZ (copyright, etc.) law that makes ISPs there uncomfortable with allowing P2P to go on, unlike in the US.
-SC
--
Atlanta Apt/Condo Cable & Broadband Info: »www.atlaptcable.info/ | |
| |
NOVA_Guy
Obama- Commander in Thief
Premium
join:2002-03-05
·VOIPo
| Re: Not a suprise said by roamer1:
Corporate networks are one thing (most block much more than just P2P)
Yep. I'm not exactly sure what's blocked here where I work. And to tell you the truth, I'm not really interested in trying to find out. 
said by roamer1:
we're talking about an ISP blocking its paying customers from using P2P apps. This is no different than cable and ILEC-owned DSL providers disallowing servers ... C*x and C*mc*st blocking VPN ... -- policies with which which I completely disagree, especially if customers are paying by bandwidth used
I agree 100% here too. This is one of the big reasons I dropped my cable modem with Cox and went with DSL from an independent company that doesn't care what I do with my bandwidth.
--
"Objects in the rear view mirror may appear closer than they are." - Meat Loaf, Bat out of Hell II | |
| bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| You need to come and replace the loser dude who's our network admin where I work. Nothing, and I mean NOTHING is blocked on the network... Kazaa, Napster, Morpheus, all of them! And they wonder were all the pipe went...
--
Java?! HA! Real programmers still use C and C++. -- www.fluorine.org | |
| | | |
|
·
·