robertfl
Premium
join:2005-10-10
Mary Esther, FL
 ·Cox VOIP
| Not going to happen
People will not be able to afford Internet if this happens. Look at what AUSSIE ISPS are doing and how many people there are on dial up because of the strict caps they have.
ISP's are greedy and don't care ENOUGH about their RES customers. If they did, better tech support, better "security" software and better FIOS like speeds.
It's bad enough Comcrap has invisible caps and now this??
Let's focus on the problems such as zombie computers sending spam to the masses and using that bandwidth.
That's what uses a lot of the bandwidth in the first place. If a customer wants to download LINUX, he/she should be able to without fear of being charged by the bite.
If ISP's want to preserve their bandwidth, EDUCATE the end user about internet safety and warn them that a computer can be used without their permission.
/me wonders
-Rob |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by robertfl  :People will not be able to afford Internet if this happens. If you're not a hog nothing will change for you. If you are one, don't expect pity from me beause you can no longer to aford to download your illegal copies of movies that are still in theaters and music and tv shows you didn't pay for. |
|
N10Cities
SILENCE I Keel You
Premium
join:2002-05-07
Roland, OK
clubs:
 ·Cox HSI
 ·World Lynx
|  Just because someone downloads a lot doesn't necessarily make them a pirate. Linux ISOs for example...download quite a few of them myself....
If Cox started charging by the bit for anyone, I would be one of the first to pull the plug and forget about internet access, period.... |
|
WALL_E
Premium
join:2003-05-28
USA
1 edit | reply to BF69
said by BF69 :said by robertfl :People will not be able to afford Internet if this happens. If you're not a hog nothing will change for you. If you are one, don't expect pity from me beause you can no longer to aford to download your illegal copies of movies that are still in theaters and music and tv shows you didn't pay for. I would agree with you if it weren't for the fact that there are limited options to acquire such content legally thanks to DRM or other impediments. I don't feel that it's immoral or unfair of me to download a TV show I like that airs in another country and isn't available for me to purchase legally. I don't feel that it is immoral or unfair for me to download a TV show I missed on TV the night before if the cable service I'm paying for offers its corresponding channel.
Acquiring content online conveniently fills in the huge void left in the marketplace by industries too focus sed on combating piracy rather than offering a compelling legal option. Until they wake up, I don't blame people who casually "pirate" content that isn't available for purchase in the first place.
I pirated music prior to the advent of decent online stores - there was no way I was paying for a full CD full of mostly garbage and 1 or 2 good tracks. Likewise, I'll continue to pirate content if I am not provided with a reasonable way to purchase it legally.
--
Ron Paul 2008! |
|
battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000
| reply to N10Cities
BullShit. You can't and will not convince me that someone who is downloading 300+GB per month is "just downloading Linux ISOs" month after month.
There would be little back lash if any from consumers if they switched to a 100Gb/mo for $X per month with $X per GB over 100Gb model.
If this ever happens then all of the major ISPs will do it. It's a matter of who is the brave one to step up and go first. They will see is as an additional revenue stream and will jump at the opportunity to grab even more money. |
|
Quaoar
join:2004-08-11
Fort Collins, CO
| Ditto! Anyone downloading over (IMO) 100GB/month cannot rationally defend their practice.
Frankly, I don't care if it take me six hours to download my chosen Linux distro at 8GB. I do care if I cannot download a 100MB file that I need because some college person elects to swamp my node, and that does happen in my town.
Linux, my rosy red a**! Maybe 50 GB in one month for five or six distros, but we all know that the top downloaders are accessing TV programs, now perhaps in HD.
There is no defense for downloading excessively, none.
Q |
|
wifi4milez
Big Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
·BroadVoice
| reply to N10Cities
said by N10Cities : Just because someone downloads a lot doesn't necessarily make them a pirate. Linux ISOs for example...download quite a few of them myself.... HAHAHAHA, I was waiting for someone to say that! Linux ISO's, yeah right! Cant you guys come up with something better??
--
я люблю Денди! |
|
Nightwchtr
join:2001-09-10
Falls Church, VA
1 edit | reply to WALL_E
njorge7388 YOU ARE A TRUE AMERICAN  |
|
whfsdude
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Washington, DC
1 edit | reply to Quaoar
said by Quaoar :Ditto! Anyone downloading over (IMO) 100GB/month cannot rationally defend their practice. Joost
Podcasts
Bandwagon (backs up my iTunes to my remote server)
System updates
OS Seeds
NBC + ABC + FOX + FRONTLINE + DISCOVERY (watching TV online)
VOIP
and normal web browsing.
I'm a bandwidth hog. No question about it. The problem is when you cannot get unlimited. I'd be happy to pay a high premium since I don't pay for cable or pots.
Right now I'm a 2gig/day cap. My solution so far has been to setup a wireless bridge and it's going good. FYI, I use anywhere from 5 to 30 gigs a day (all of it legally). |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| reply to robertfl
said by robertfl :People will not be able to afford Internet if this happens. I call BS. Do you mean that people won't be able to afford Internet access just like they can't afford cell phones, cable TV, and an SUV with big fat 22's all the while struggling to pay rent and feed the family?said by robertfl :If ISP's want to preserve their bandwidth, EDUCATE the end user about internet safety and warn them that a computer can be used without their permission. That's not an ISP's job...at least unless you want to pay them extra for that "value added service". You're speaking contrary to the "dumb pipe" that everyone around here desires their ISPs to be. Personally, given the fact that bandwidth is a finite resource, just like numerous other metered resources, I believe the billing structure should shift to a method similar to that of a cell phone plan. Will it be popular? No. Will people bitch? They always do. Is it the right thing to do to maintain consumer costs? Yes. |
|
robertfl
Premium
join:2005-10-10
Mary Esther, FL | reply to Nightwchtr
DRM is evil and it DOESN'T protect the artist only the INDUSTRY's WALLET.
and sorry but i refuse to waste my time on crappy downloads.
-rob |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | reply to wifi4milez
Microsoft Updates...  |
|
robertfl
Premium
join:2005-10-10
Mary Esther, FL
·Cox VOIP
| reply to openbox9
at the same time though, this shit I get several times a day is using the ISP's pipe and there for should be at least partly to blame.
dictionary attacks, the latest sex scam the latest viagara rip off the latest hot stock picks are what's clogging up (in a small fraction) the isp's pipe.
it's getting to the point where e-mail is useless.
rob |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to WALL_E
said by WALL_E :I would agree with you if it weren't for the fact that there are limited options to acquire such content legally thanks to DRM or other impediments. How did DRM come about? Because people kept stealing crap.
I don't feel that it's immoral or unfair of me to download a TV show I like that airs in another country and isn't available for me to purchase legally. I don't feel that it is immoral or unfair for me to download a TV show I missed on TV the night before if the cable service I'm paying for offers its corresponding channel.
Acquiring content online conveniently fills in the huge void left in the marketplace by industries too focus sed on combating piracy rather than offering a compelling legal option. Until they wake up, I don't blame people who casually "pirate" content that isn't available for purchase in the first place.
I pirated music prior to the advent of decent online stores - there was no way I was paying for a full CD full of mostly garbage and 1 or 2 good tracks. Likewise, I'll continue to pirate content if I am not provided with a reasonable way to purchase it legally. So if the bank turns you down for a loan then it's ok to rob the big evil corporate bank? One could justify breaking any law, rule or code of ethics. Doesn't mean it's ok. |
|
WALL_E
Premium
join:2003-05-28
USA
| said by BF69 :said by WALL_E :I would agree with you if it weren't for the fact that there are limited options to acquire such content legally thanks to DRM or other impediments. How did DRM come about? Because people kept stealing crap. I don't feel that it's immoral or unfair of me to download a TV show I like that airs in another country and isn't available for me to purchase legally. I don't feel that it is immoral or unfair for me to download a TV show I missed on TV the night before if the cable service I'm paying for offers its corresponding channel.
Acquiring content online conveniently fills in the huge void left in the marketplace by industries too focus sed on combating piracy rather than offering a compelling legal option. Until they wake up, I don't blame people who casually "pirate" content that isn't available for purchase in the first place.
I pirated music prior to the advent of decent online stores - there was no way I was paying for a full CD full of mostly garbage and 1 or 2 good tracks. Likewise, I'll continue to pirate content if I am not provided with a reasonable way to purchase it legally. So if the bank turns you down for a loan then it's ok to rob the big evil corporate bank? One could justify breaking any law, rule or code of ethics. Doesn't mean it's ok. If you're honestly defending DRM than there is no way I can possibly have an intelligent conversation with you. DRM is an entirely anti-consumer creation that I will not tolerate in products that I pay for.
The fact that I get a better experience as a consumer by pirating content shows that the industry is remarkably out-of-touch with reality. I pay for software and content that I consider to be of value. I purchase OS X because it is a reasonable price with no copy protection. I will not purchase Vista because it's price is unreasonable and its protection is unreasonable. (Not that it should matter to you, but I also don't steal Windows. I run Linux on my non-Mac machines).
And please refrain from using lame analogies that in no way accurately represent the situation. NO ONE lost money because I chose to download episodes of "The IT Crowd" this season as they were released overseas.
--
Ron Paul 2008! |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| reply to robertfl
Hmm, I don't seem to have anywhere near the problem that you speak of. I've got 10 actively managed e-mail accounts and I get maybe 20 SPAM messages per week total. Everything else is filtered at my mail server and never sees my ISP's network. I've tested my ability to hammer my ISP's connection over a month's time by firing up my BT client and downloading/uploading as much crap as I could reasonably spend time searching for and I was only able to transfer a total of about 300 GB. That included me initiating two or three "Linux ISO" downloads before work and two or three "Linux ISO" downloads after work every day and then letting the uploads continue until I reached at least a 2:1 ratio. Only 300 GB during my test. How people can continue to justify insane amounts of data transfers per month (or utilize what they're downloading) and continue to blame these transfers on the reasons that continue to be abused is beyond me. So, I still believe that a usage-based model is the way to maintain consumer costs and levy costs of expanding infrastructure to those who are using the infrastructure. Pay for what you use...what a strange concept. |
|
compton
join:2002-02-08
Brooklyn, NY
| reply to Quaoar
said by Quaoar :Ditto! Anyone downloading over (IMO) 100GB/month cannot rationally defend their practice. Frankly, I don't care if it take me six hours to download my chosen Linux distro at 8GB. I do care if I cannot download a 100MB file that I need because some college person elects to swamp my node, and that does happen in my town. Linux, my rosy red a**! Maybe 50 GB in one month for five or six distros, but we all know that the top downloaders are accessing TV programs, now perhaps in HD. There is no defense for downloading excessively, none. Q It’s not necessarily true that someone who down loads 100 gigabytes a month is pirating copyright material. There are a lot of services on the Internet that will eat up bandwidth. Some services that can use a lot of bandwidth are (1) streaming radio (XM, Cirrus, iTunes radio, etc) that is streaming at or above 156 Kbps; (2) down loading legal paid for DVD’s (porn, old movies, etc) at 4 gigs a pop; (3) downloading high quality TV shows from iTunes or other similar services; (4) downloading high quality movies from Netflix or Blockbuster online services; (5) using VOIP, online gaming, watching videos from Youtube, Yahoo, etc.
The day is soon coming where 100 gig usage is normal. We are using the Internet more and more for routine stuf. |
|
compton
join:2002-02-08
Brooklyn, NY
| reply to wifi4milez
said by wifi4milez :said by N10Cities : Just because someone downloads a lot doesn't necessarily make them a pirate. Linux ISOs for example...download quite a few of them myself.... HAHAHAHA, I was waiting for someone to say that! Linux ISO's, yeah right! Cant you guys come up with something better?? Did you read my post? I guess not. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to WALL_E
said by WALL_E :If you're honestly defending DRM than there is no way I can possibly have an intelligent conversation with you. DRM is an entirely anti-consumer creation that I will not tolerate in products that I pay for. A) I am not defneding DRM I am explaining to you as to why is exists. Big difference. I wish DRM didn't exist. I know whose fault it is for it's existance is though.
B) No one is forcing to buy DRMed products. Doesn't mean you have a right to pirate them either. If you want to make a statement to the companies then do so with your pocketbook and do not buy DRM products. Don't pirate them. When you do you create a value for them( because only an idiot pirate would steal something that has no value ) and thus continue to enforce the belief of the big evil coroporations that these products are worth protecting with DRM.
Does DRM work? No. Do consumers hate it? Yes. Do you want the big corps to stop using it? Of course. Then do the things that will stop them from using it. Pirating is not one of them. As wrong as the big corps are that DRM stops pirating people like you are equally wrong in thinking that pirating is going to make the big corps stop using DRM.
The fact is that if people weren't so stupid to starting using things like the original Napster and Kazza and all those other things to pirate songs then DRM would never have seen the light of day and music would be available online DRM free and less than half the price it is now. FACT.
I am not going to blame the bank that my ATM fee went up to pay for the armed gaurd at the door. I am going to blame the theives that rob the banks.
The fact that I get a better experience as a consumer by pirating content shows that the industry is remarkably out-of-touch with reality. Even without DRM the vast majority of pirates would still do so because they are too cheap to pay 99, 79 or even 49 cents for a song. FACT. DRM is just a convienent excuse to justify their pirating.
If you are suggesting the vast majority of people that pirate do it out of some sense of higher moral obligation to get the big bad corporations to change their ways, rather than to serve their own selfish needs, you seriously need help.
And please refrain from using lame analogies that in no way accurately represent the situation. NO ONE lost money because I chose to download episodes of "The IT Crowd" this season as they were released overseas.
yes yes continue to justify your theivery instead of just admitting you are a thief. I'd have more respect for you if you would. |
|
backness
join:2005-07-08
K2P OW2
| are you kidding?
If Napster was never invented...
A) Piracy would still exist although it might not be as main stream
B) The CD manufacturers are still fighting tooth and nail to avoid online distribution to this day. They have done almost nothing to update their business model TO THIS DAY!
If you really believe that Big Music would lovingly embrace online distribution if Naptster was never invented, you need your head examined. |
|
