Slashdot Mirror
ISPs Fight Against Encrypted BitTorrent Downloads
oglsmm writes to mention an Ars Technica article about a new product intended to detect and throttle encrypted BitTorrent traffic. When torrents first saw common use ISPs would throttle the bandwidth available to them, in order to ensure connectivity for everyone. Some clients began encrypting their data to get around this, and the company Allot Communications is now claiming their NetEnforcer product will return the advantage to the ISPs. From the article: "Certainly, increasing BitTorrent traffic is a concern for ISPs. In early 2004, torrents accounted for 35 percent of all traffic on the Internet. By the end of that year, this figure had almost doubled, and some estimate that in certain markets, such as Asia, torrent traffic uses as much as 80 percent of all bandwidth. However, BitTorrent is an extremely important tool that has many uses other than what everyone assumes it is good for, namely movie piracy."
If you can get a phone line, you can get a leased line from your telco.
I have no sympathy for aoyone who gets infected and ends up hosting a spambot. Hopefully the big bandwidth bill would be a wakeup call to not be a fucking retard online. I've been running Windows XP wide open to the internet with no antivirus and the built-in firewall in a default configuration ever since SP2 came out and have never had a virus, worm, spyware, or anything of the like. Hell, when the WMF vulnerability was published I had to actually TRY to get it to infect a VM I loaded for that purpose.
In my eyes, getting an infection nowadays takes a total lack of brainpower, and if high bills get those people to either get off the internet or learn to use their systems properly, it's a good thing.
I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
"forcing you to sign away all your rights"... hardly... you have a choice, whether you like it or not.
Anyone with half a brain knows that their performance claims are NOT the norm, and are heavily defended and described in their SLA. But of course, it's all worded so that they aren't actually lying, they're just reporting or claiming a specific performance given specific conditions. If you're believing those "best case" numbers, then you're an idiot.
They are a business, out to make money and protect their interest. It is NOT their job, nor their responsibility, to be looking after your interests.
If you don't like it, don't sign up. If you sign up, don't be a moron and NOT read the fine print, or read their SLA. And don't think that just because you paid your $30/month that you're then somehow entitled to fuck over everyone else's performance because you want to run a whack of torrents all day, every day. If you want that kind of service, then pony up the cash for the appropriate service.
I have no time or patience for anyone who enters into a contract and then bitches about the contract afterwards. If they broke the contract, then take them to court! Oh, but wait, they HAVEN'T broken the contract, have they? You're just pissed off that you couldn't take advantage of it like you thought you could, so now you're whining about it.
I'd rather see people start fighting for more choice and lack of monopolies when it comes to ISP's.
$0.02 (CDN)
I don't know where you live,
The question is more like, where do you live because your experience is not the common one.