Wilde_1
join:2004-01-13
Pittsburgh, PA | reply to j23s3afj
Re: My experience with Comcast bandwidth suspension OK, I have red every page of this Thread over the last 5 days and I have to say it makes for very interesting reading. I just found the site while researching this comcast mess but wish I would have found it a long time ago.
Favorite quote from thread "aww hell naw" also a favorite saying of mine
My letter came on 1-8-04 and I was furious. I have made two calls to Comcast(and emailed the local News Consumer show), one to the number on the paper and one to another number I was referred to. I made the last call yesterday evening and the response I was given actually upset me more BUT I could not take it out on the person relaying the information because you could tell it was a slip on her part that she rapidly attempted to cover and I most likely would have second thought the News email had I spoke to this person earlier. I was told plain out that it is the Time frame and/or the amount of "online time" I was using. This was where she slipped up and you could actually hear the supervisor in the background catch it. I was rapidly transferred to the supervisor and the call was conferenced between the three of us and the feeble attempt to correct the error began.
I will start this next section by stating the supervisor earned my full respect by not only supporting the rep but did not deny a word of it. I respect this because being in a Mgmt roll for many years you must support your team to clients and then correct them afterward, never slam a fellow employee in front of others.
The Supervisor and the rep went into a little detail that I feel I was only given because of the slip up. My node is AT FULL capacity(giggle here No $hit??!?!?). This dept did not currently have the numbers to give me as for my Downloads in Dec BUT I do...135Gb down 1.5Gb up(these are approx but very close explained below). The supervisor explained that I received a "mass mailing"..."The letters are basically form letters that are mass printed and mailed" Asking for clarification she stated it would be too time consuming to edit and put in actual numbers for every letter. (My fault here I did not ask how many went out but it leads me to believe there are many more than the 100-500 I have heard in this forum.) I did question the use of the term "Unlimited Access" since they are the ones who claimed it is the amount of time and she said you have access to it 24/7 but due to the amount of data you are transferring we have to curb it.(not the exact words but close). I asked her for a solid number and she was unable to give one. I asked her about me setting a limit on my router as to the data through put and she claimed she would make a note in my account that I was attempting to make adjustments on my network to comply with their request and gave me the 856 number for any assistance I might need(yeah i know why bother but I am calling them tomorrow just to CMA).
Now the big question I have seen and honestly I have as well has been "WHAT ARE YOU D/L'ing" Well my "firewall" keeps track of such info  The firewall is a P-233 Linux box and due to the way I wanted my kids to be able to access in the internet I have it logging all type of info, just to keep an eye on them and their online activities, so here goes.
The biggest portion was actually my Daughter and I from the netnews server hitting up Anime Groups. She loves anime and this accounted for 52 Gb. Next is my son streaming from Yahoo, real media, and (d/l)Rhapsody(pay mp3 type service) while surfing or whatever from the looks of things. Which BTW take a look at it on the Comcast page you will love the "Unlimited" statement there (I had to talk to him about because I can't figure how 19gb Adds up in streaming(seem to remember shaking my head earlier about someone streaming 4-5 media stations at once 24/7). Next again is me being the jerk here...getting onto son before I finished looking My video conferencing with My family out of state WHILE playing Online games with them is totally uncalled for when we only use the audio to begin with, these two activities racked up 14.5gigs. Then there are the  special videos I have for me hehehe 5 gig. And finally transfer of work related stuff to another machine on my network for some odd reason was routing out through the Comcast network. This was almost 20 gig(UP bW was not counted since it was not picked up by the firewall because the folders were shared and the Linux box moves them on schedule). The rest was showing as normal Http/Pop3/ftp which could be anything from service packs for the 5 machines floating around here to to the 3 linux versions I am testing for the firewall upgrade(would like to put it on and old P-III I have laying around here). OH and Email  !! The step I took for the moment was to set a speed cap of 1MB/s on the linux box and have it control things from there on any traffic other than Http. This is plenty for the news groups and any other traffic while leaving Web browsing total open. I may only up in the weee mornings on weekends when the kids are off since we normally all end up on some online game shooting each other at some point on Saturday night/Sunday Morning. Almost forgot My daughter and those damn pogo games(6 gb).
Are these numbers accurate, only from what I can tell at a quick look, I would need to seriously dive into it to get exact numbers to web sites/services but these do not look that far off. Is it all legal, the only thing I question right now is the Anime, not sure being it is Japanese with English Subs I am going to check into that though I never realized exactly how much was there monthly. That I have made a point to inform my daughter would have to be cut back drastically an no d/l until I figure the legal stuff out on them. I am fairly sure my videos are safe since the varing websites have them available for download.
So question is this, does this seem like fair usage? I do pay for each of the machines (the three that are connected to the net) to have separate IP's since technically is is against the AUP/TOS to have a machine or device that acts as a DHCP Server(I know they are referring to handing IP's out on their network but why bother). |
|
| Jesus, if anyone downloads 100 gigs a month than they defenitely do not have much of a life. Hell, I don't have much of a life for reading the first five pages of this thread! Who the hell downloads 100 gigs a month? What percentage of that is porn and pirated software? I'm lucky if I download a gig a month. Why argue on a forum about the cap? Contact the company. Oh wait, you can't do anything about it because you signed a contract... I know, I'll spend countless hours telling everyone about it on a forum where absolutely nothing can get accomplished.. God I love the internet!! Now comes the part where someone calls me a troll and the moderator deletes my post.. Thanks in advance... |
|
| said by GoOutside:
Jesus, if anyone downloads 100 gigs a month than they defenitely do not have much of a life. Hell, I don't have much of a life for reading the first five pages of this thread! Who the hell downloads 100 gigs a month? What percentage of that is porn and pirated software? I'm lucky if I download a gig a month. Why argue on a forum about the cap? Contact the company. Oh wait, you can't do anything about it because you signed a contract... I know, I'll spend countless hours telling everyone about it on a forum where absolutely nothing can get accomplished.. God I love the internet!! Now comes the part where someone calls me a troll and the moderator deletes my post.. Thanks in advance...
Most of us heavy downloaders have little respect for copyright as it is enforced nowadays, but it is not true that all 30GB+ downloaders are using their connections to undermine civilization.
Some of you who are complaining about our extreme downloading habits have failed to point out that it takes many hard drives, and very many blank CDs to absorb 100GB+ per month. (100GB = 150 to 200 CDs.)
Not all, but much of what is downloaded is consumed or discarded. This applies to videos and music, but this also applies to applications and games. Believe or not, many so-called pirates actually pay for certain applications and games, once they test their usefulness and determine their affordability.
Copyright law and software-lease rules are in a very bad state nowadays. It can be argued that the current rules actually stifle innovation, and make knowledge and entertainment the purview of the affluent.
It is obvious to all of us that some extreme downloaders have no respect for copyright law. On the other hand, there is a large middle group of downloaders, who don't spend all their waking moments in front of the monitor, and take issue with the way copyright is enforced. There is also a small, but significant group, who use the internet in their profession or use it to simply stream video.
No one should criticize anyone for making the most of their internet connection. We're all shelling out a lot of money. Some of us want to make the most of that money. Let us fight our fight with Comcast. This has nothing to do with you casual downloaders.
That's my response to the player haters. |
|
| reply to Wilde_1
said by Wilde_1:
So question is this, does this seem like fair usage? I do pay for each of the machines (the three that are connected to the net) to have separate IP's since technically is is against the AUP/TOS to have a machine or device that acts as a DHCP Server(I know they are referring to handing IP's out on their network but why bother).
Technically you're sharing a single connection among multiple machines, and choosing not to the make use of your other IP addresses. So technically you are in violation, as you have already presumed.
I think the only issue you would have is that technical support won't answer questions regarding routers, hubs, or DHCP servers. I don't think anyone is going to care that you are set up this way.
I've been sharing a connection for a long time, and I have not had any grief. I do make sure to set up my computers to not share a connection when the tech guy comes over! |
|
 jansm38Vn800-BPremium
join:2003-05-19
Blackwood, NJ | reply to anon20938473
quote:
Most of us heavy downloaders have little respect for copyright as it is enforced nowadays.
Copyright law and software-lease rules are in a very bad state nowadays. It can be argued that the current rules actually stifle innovation, and make knowledge and entertainment the purview of the affluent.
So that makes it ok to steal?
There is no justification for theft. |
|
 dravenEx-Mod 2004-10
join:2002-02-20
my bunker
1 edit | reply to anon20938473
said by anon20938473:
No one should criticize anyone for making the most of their internet connection. We're all shelling out a lot of money. Some of us want to make the most of that money. Let us fight our fight with Comcast. This has nothing to do with you casual downloaders.
Good post of sorts. I want to clarify my particular position on this issue. I have no problems with what people download or how they use their connection. I've downloaded plenty of copyrighted stuff in my day.
My point is that, do people really have a leg to stand on if they're complaining that Comcast won't let them use their connection to download 100+ gigs of data that contains a significant amount of illegal material? That's all.
--
"I never thought much of the courage of a lion tamer. Inside the cage he is at least safe from people." - George Bernard Shaw |
|
| Re: My experience with Comcast bandwidth suspensio But for some of us (or at least me), most months everything I was pulling was very legal. There are many groups that allow for the free taping and trading of their live concerts and the preferred method of encoding is NOT mp3. A live show of these groups can be 400 MB to 1.6 GB consistently. I for one was willing to pay extra as I knew I was a heavy user, that is why I signed up for the "Pro" level of service even though I had no use for anything except the extra upload speeds. I used to contribute freely to the newsgroups and have played with Bit Torrent (both for music and Linux Distro) and FurtherNet. The people who put together Further Net even testified in front of congress about LEGAL uses for peer-peer networking. They only allow the trading of groups that have publically made statements in support of taping and trading. Music has always been a HUGE part of my life although the tactics of the RIAA have caused me to stop purchasing new music from groups that do not support the taping/trading or are Independent of the RIAA. I have never done Napster/Kazaa or any of the other common methods of trading "unlicensed" music. I have a collection in excess of 450 commercial CD's over 600 vinyl albums and approx 200 cassettes and 700+ 45's. I used to have 20+ 8-tracks too. I also have a collection of over 2,000 concerts from many groups, some collected on-line, some going back to the old days of snail mail and tape trading. Without tiered service and clearly defined limits, Comcast has lost me permanently as a customer and I doubt they will ever get me back even if they become the only broadband ISP available.
1-4 more days until Verizon goes live for me. |
|
|
|
| reply to jansm38
Re: My experience with Comcast bandwidth suspension said by jansm38:
quote:
Most of us heavy downloaders have little respect for copyright as it is enforced nowadays.
Copyright law and software-lease rules are in a very bad state nowadays. It can be argued that the current rules actually stifle innovation, and make knowledge and entertainment the purview of the affluent.
So that makes it ok to steal?So that makes it ok to steal?So that makes it ok to steal?So that makes it ok to steal?So that makes it ok to steal?So that makes it ok to steal?
There is no justification for theft.
leeching regardless of content is not stealing, but robbing a bank is |
|
 JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to draven
said by draven:
My point is that, do people really have a leg to stand on if they're complaining that Comcast won't let them use their connection to download 100+ gigs of data that contains a significant amount of illegal material? That's all.
ISPs are not law enforcement agencies. Unless ordered to do so, they have no authorization to inspect the data customers are transferring.
Do we really need byte-by-byte approval from our ISPs?
Should we start submitting travel plans every time we refuel our vehicles? After all, if we fill our tank, chances are we plan to distribute drugs. |
|
| reply to draven
said by draven:
My point is that, do people really have a leg to stand on if they're complaining that Comcast won't let them use their connection to download 100+ gigs of data that contains a significant amount of illegal material?
If they specifically cite that they are using their connection to download illegal material, that would not likely be a good move since it is an admission that they were violating the Illegal Activities clause of the Comcast Abuse Policy (as well as potentially opening themselves up to non-Comcast enforcement activities that would make losing their Comcast account seem minor).
The most valid complaint that I see is still the basis of the Abuse activity: The letters cite the AUP section dealing with Bandwidth Limitations; the feedback from customers who have contacted Abuse suggest that there is no established Limitation. Even so, Comcast maintains eminent domain over their sandbox. |
|
Wilde_1
join:2004-01-13
Pittsburgh, PA | reply to anon20938473
No the IP's on each machine are Comcast ip's I do not have any assigned internal ip's working on any of hte machine that make contact to the internet. Each has it's own "port" just as you would on a switch type system by adding an additional card in the linux box for every machine. So, even there i am in the guidelines of the Comcast folks. The Firewall was not hat hard to build the only headache was fighting hardware address for the NIC's |
|
dravenEx-Mod 2004-10
join:2002-02-20
my bunker | reply to LMiB
Re: My experience with Comcast bandwidth suspensio said by LMiB:
I for one was willing to pay extra as I knew I was a heavy user, that is why I signed up for the "Pro" level of service even though I had no use for anything except the extra upload speeds.
I certainly do not agree with the fact that Pro users are limited in the same ways as standard users in terms of bandwidth. Comcast is dropping the ball on that one.
--
"I never thought much of the courage of a lion tamer. Inside the cage he is at least safe from people." - George Bernard Shaw |
|
dravenEx-Mod 2004-10
join:2002-02-20
my bunker
1 edit | reply to JTRockville
Re: My experience with Comcast bandwidth suspension said by JTRockville:
ISPs are not law enforcement agencies. Unless ordered to do so, they have no authorization to inspect the data customers are transferring.
I'm not arguing the enforcement policies of an ISP at all. That's a whole different animal.
What I'm saying, again, is that I would speculate at least 50% (a generous underestimate, it's probably way higher) of bandwidth abusers are not engaged in legal activities. Whether Comcast actually recognizes that or not is not my point. It's that many users who are complaining have no leg to stand on because they are breaking the law as things are right now with the DMCA (whether we think its right or wrong).
Those who are downloading legal stuff in large amounts are most likely a minority and Comcast doesn't really see the need to differentiate right now. This customer base is so small that they can afford the loss because they know for every 1 of these they lose, they will pick up 100 people who don't download anime or concerts. I don't agree with it but that seems to be the way it is.
Did anyone here ever try to tell the judge that they demand their driver's license back because, even though they were caught speeding 10 times in a month, they own a Porsche so they should be allowed to? And if they impound your car, you certainly aren't going to be able to justify getting it back because you need at your pot stash in the glovebox
--
"I never thought much of the courage of a lion tamer. Inside the cage he is at least safe from people." - George Bernard Shaw |
|
| Re: My experience w/Comcast BANDWIDTH SUSPENSIONS Blech:
"Did anyone here ever try to tell the judge that they demand their driver's license .........etc...etc"
You're trying to kick-start a dead and well-beaten horse. Read the Name of this thread and the quite numerous posts on this already. Let's try to stick to topic. |
|
dravenEx-Mod 2004-10
join:2002-02-20
my bunker
2 edits | said by L Campanazo:
You're trying to kick-start a dead and well-beaten horse. Read the Name of this thread and the quite numerous posts on this already. Let's try to stick to topic.
That's fine. But ignoring certain facts of the issue does not improve the argument in one's favor.
Obviously, this forum is not actively sought out by those wishing to throw Comcast praise. I realize I'm a minority on this issue, but hey, someone's got to take the other stance. That being said, I think I've repeated my opinions enough and I'll just follow along in the shadows --
"I never thought much of the courage of a lion tamer. Inside the cage he is at least safe from people." - George Bernard Shaw |
|
jansm38Vn800-BPremium
join:2003-05-19
Blackwood, NJ
1 edit | reply to L Campanazo
said by L Campanazo:
Blech:
"Did anyone here ever try to tell the judge that they demand their driver's license .........etc...etc"
You're trying to kick-start a dead and well-beaten horse. Read the Name of this thread and the quite numerous posts on this already. Let's try to stick to topic.
Yeah, we wouldn't want opposing points of view or opinions to get in the way of the spread of FUD.
90% of the posts in this thread stray from the topic but it's all relevant.
Blech is 100% correct. There is no way that every single person that got a letter is completely clean of "questionable" activities. It's a shame that those that do have legitimate reasons for high consumption are being lumped in with the real abusers. But without Comcast actually sniffing packets there is no way for them to know. If Comcast did start packet sniffing then everybody would start screaming about that.
[edited for spelling] |
|
JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| said by jansm38:
There is no way that every single person that got a letter is completely clean of "questionable" activities.
The same can be said of folks who have not received a letter, no? |
|
| reply to jansm38
jansm38:
"Yeah, we wouldn't want opposing points of view or opinions to get in the way of the spread of FUD."
We already have 100+ posts from Matisaro and other fedayeen-comcast.
Opposing views are more than welcome, even more so if they stick to the topic and try to avoid redundancy. |
|
 goober22Resident Duh-Huh Member
join:2001-12-28
Panama City, FL | reply to draven
Re: My experience with Comcast bandwidth suspension said by draven:
Did anyone here ever try to tell the judge that they demand their driver's license back because, even though they were caught speeding 10 times in a month, they own a Porsche so they should be allowed to? And if they impound your car, you certainly aren't going to be able to justify getting it back because you need at your pot stash in the glovebox
Not exactly the same since that penealty is a result of an offence (speeding). What if the offense has no tangible guidelines?
Imagine being stopped by a police officer and being told you were speeding (Porsche or Yugo). The officer says to slow it down. You say you did not know that there was a limit and ask what the limit is, and he replies that there isn't one, but you where too fast. You ask how fast you were going, and he replies that he can't tell you that, but slow it down.
When you ask how to conform, he replies to cut your speed by 1/2. You try to guestimate this but get stopped again. You get the same answers again; There is no speed limit but you were too fast; I can't tell you your speed but you need to slow down.
Finally you get stopped again and they tell you that you cannot drive on that city's roads for a year. Sure, you may be able to go through another city to get where you're going (maybe not), but how can they expect you to abide by their laws (rules/aup/tos) if they do not tell you what the limits are? |
|
| What is particularly odious of comcast is that they have a 24/7 marketing blitz stressing "now 2x the speed" join our city roads, "experience 100% broadband", etc. |
|
