To be fair what she is refering to about "normal traffic patterns" is the sustained nature of P2P. That said there are much better ways to go about traffic control then what they are doing. I love P2P and see an enormous amount of potential in the future. At some point the ISPs and P2P programs need to find a way to get along. What that is, I don't know, but we have to figure it out somehow.
Thoughts? (and please dont just cry about the evil ISPs. We honestly need to have a constructive conversation about this. (yes, i do realize this is slashdot))
And frankly "F you" for assuming that all P2P traffic is illegal file sharing. There are many legitimate uses for P2P that is unfortunately getting trapped by Comcast's technique. The shotgun approach isn't always the best way.
"so they can keep their service alive without reducing dividends to the shareholders", there, fixed that for you.
So what is wrong with running a business. These guys are not a non-profit and they are frankly not oversubscribing nearly as much as you think they are. I can say that its self-preservation until I am blue in the face, but chances are good you wont believe me.
So there we have it. I believe we will have to agree to disagree.
DPI is mostly used for the sake of bandwidth control rather then seeing what the customer is doing. And yes, we can debate as to the nature of bandwidth controls, but to give a blanket DPI == spying is the same as saying P2P == illegal music downloads.
Again though, its not feasible to have a 1:1 ratio of bandwidth at the WAN. Unless you want to play T1 prices, or more, for guarantied bandwidth there has to be something put in place for control. People are not going to just regulate themselves, nor should they have to.
Again, I am not advocating tearing down the broadband experience, but there is no reason that the ISP has to let the system destroy the network for everyone. Lets be realistic, completely unregulated P2P CAN destroy a network for ALL users.
You are absolutely correct. For the longest (damn) time this did work. The problem is now the traffic doesn't burst like it used to. It's more sustained and oversubscription rules are breaking. Most ISPs are honestly trying to play a game of self-preservation so they can keep their service alive without being cost prohibitive.
DPI is not evil so long as it is used to make the network better as a whole. As with anything it can be bent to the will of evil, but I disagree with that completely. I believe in certain forms of limiting so long as it doesn't degrade the internet experience as a whole.
And yes, I consider myself a backer of net neutrality. All I can say is, I am a realist.
speaking of free software: for debian there's a little tool that checks your locally installed packages, and reports how much % of them are 100% free software, written by i think RMS himself? For a nominal fee of course.
See... this is why I have and will continue to advocate industry standardization on formats. That way everyone can make the same damn thing and we can have competition. Theoretically we will get a higher quality product as well. Not just the one with the better marketing campaign.
Slashdot Mirror
Somebody please mod this guy insightful. Thanks,
Rage dump.
Netcraft confirmed it.
Seriously... whoever modded this offtopic has never seen Star Trek. Read the wikipedia page then mod appropriately.
Possible suggestions are funny or insightful.
To be fair what she is refering to about "normal traffic patterns" is the sustained nature of P2P. That said there are much better ways to go about traffic control then what they are doing. I love P2P and see an enormous amount of potential in the future. At some point the ISPs and P2P programs need to find a way to get along. What that is, I don't know, but we have to figure it out somehow.
Thoughts? (and please dont just cry about the evil ISPs. We honestly need to have a constructive conversation about this. (yes, i do realize this is slashdot))
And frankly "F you" for assuming that all P2P traffic is illegal file sharing. There are many legitimate uses for P2P that is unfortunately getting trapped by Comcast's technique. The shotgun approach isn't always the best way.
I guess when all you have is a hammer....
Then purchase a T1 line. Then you can do whatever you want and you have dedicated bandwidth.
In a residential ISP setup you share the bandwidth with others. That, my friend, is why its cheaper then getting a dedicated, business connection.
"so they can keep their service alive without reducing dividends to the shareholders", there, fixed that for you.
So what is wrong with running a business. These guys are not a non-profit and they are frankly not oversubscribing nearly as much as you think they are. I can say that its self-preservation until I am blue in the face, but chances are good you wont believe me.So there we have it. I believe we will have to agree to disagree.
DPI != spying.
DPI is mostly used for the sake of bandwidth control rather then seeing what the customer is doing. And yes, we can debate as to the nature of bandwidth controls, but to give a blanket DPI == spying is the same as saying P2P == illegal music downloads.
My 2 cents...
Again though, its not feasible to have a 1:1 ratio of bandwidth at the WAN. Unless you want to play T1 prices, or more, for guarantied bandwidth there has to be something put in place for control. People are not going to just regulate themselves, nor should they have to.
Again, I am not advocating tearing down the broadband experience, but there is no reason that the ISP has to let the system destroy the network for everyone. Lets be realistic, completely unregulated P2P CAN destroy a network for ALL users.
You are absolutely correct. For the longest (damn) time this did work. The problem is now the traffic doesn't burst like it used to. It's more sustained and oversubscription rules are breaking. Most ISPs are honestly trying to play a game of self-preservation so they can keep their service alive without being cost prohibitive.
DPI is not evil so long as it is used to make the network better as a whole. As with anything it can be bent to the will of evil, but I disagree with that completely. I believe in certain forms of limiting so long as it doesn't degrade the internet experience as a whole.
And yes, I consider myself a backer of net neutrality. All I can say is, I am a realist.
OK new tactic... lunar power bat. Brilliant!!!!!
He may be correct, but he is still a Troll just by the virtue of how he said it.
Some people seem to forget tact online.
and netcraft confirms it.
See... this is why I have and will continue to advocate industry standardization on formats. That way everyone can make the same damn thing and we can have competition. Theoretically we will get a higher quality product as well. Not just the one with the better marketing campaign.
Done and Done.
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=449538&cid=22383956
This is why I read at Score: 0. This is a gem of a comment... Where are my points when I need them.
Screw it.. I'll sacrifice my own Karma.
Kudos and well done.
NO! BAD! Turn in your geek, nerd, and/or Slashdot card RIGHT NOW! An electronics budget can never, I repeat NEVER, be to big.
Kids these days.*
* Yes, I realize my UID is higher then the parent's.
Is it bad if I read the GP and didn't notice anything wrong at first?
Somebody should warn 3M that they are next. I'm sure they would want to prepare. Ok, sorry I'll get my coat.
are you sure about that?
trouble is it takes about three hours to get up to that speed.
I remember hearing something about the Windows random number generator...
Nope... next question please.