Maybe all the students in the dorm could each claim they were the guilty party? ("I'm Sparticus!")
I like the idea. Even better, I like the idea that all MAC address belong to some Linksys router or another in the dorm. Beyond NAT, it could be anyone.
Comcast is trying to deal with it in a method (forged packets) that's a felony in 9 states, so they get very little sympathy there.
While competing with DSL, they are trying to avoid having to drop the unlimited from their advertising. They got caught. It would have been much better for them to roll out a new guaranteed high speed plan with a minimum monthly data transfer. After that, then the hogs can be throttled after X number of GB has been transferred. They can no longer offer unlimited accounts when too many 24X7 saturated users join the party and suck it dry.
If Comcast did that, they would again be in hot waster for their advertised unlimited service plan. They are caught between a rock and a hard place on this one. That would be the ideal situation as most users would have fantastic bandwidth most of the time. The downside is when people hit the cap, and think thier connection is broken, the constant calls to service would be a problmem. To do it properly, they would need to provide a usage meter for each customer. This is again another expense for Comcast. Metering and billing/limiting is an entire new expense infrastructure. With Peer to Peer, it's either throttling, dropping users who hog or metered internet. Doing nothing is not an option as the usage of automated large file transfers continues to grow.
It is time for Comcast to drop unlimited accounts and move everyone to a guaranteed monthly high speed data plan. Those who run over can have the options of metered additional bandwidth or throttling like they do in Australia.
The advantage for low bandwidth users would be the ability to get lower priced plans. This may enable more to move from dial-up to broadband, as the price of about $60/month is a little steep for many who just check a few web pages and use e-mail. Slashdot works fine on dial-up after you block immages and flash. I only got broadband at home because we have a family of 6 and it was tying up the phone line. An ISO could easly be grabbed at work as I had a 60 Mag connection to my desk. The cost of broadband and employer provided broadband at work is the reason many are still on dial-up at home.
A sweet connection is one where you are warned the download may take several hours, so you get a cup of coffee, and when you get back 10 minutes later, the transfer is done. With that connection at work, I don't need to pay for broadband at home, except for the family.
why am I not allowed to use it? Your rationale is that if I went to McDonald's and was sold a double cheeseburger, I shouldn't be allowed to eat the whole thing.
The same reason you can go to an all you can eat buffet and can eat all you can. If you bring in an automated eating machine with you that continued to eat 24X7 when you were no longer in the chair would be a problem in an all you can eat place. Unlimited was intended for while the space between the keyboard and chair was occupied. The automated 24X7 hogs are a problem on the supply side as they eat the resources that would otherwise feed about 200 other typical users. Buying the extra bits to feed this growing part of the population while not charging more for the entrance fee is the problem. Putting a cap or asking them to leave are the only options to avoiding negative income. Simply ignoring the problem as more hogs show up is not sustainable and not an option.
Most users do not have an issue with paying for a service,
So why do you think a good part of the US is still on dial-up? The high cost of a broadband connection is directly the largest reason. High bandwidth users will pay the fee. For those who check for an email from the grandkids are fine with dial-up as they won't get their value out of it.
The ISPs made a mistake and should have sold bandwidth the same way cell phone plans do. An unlimited account should be priced in the $200-$600 range to cover the use by the high bandwidth users.
A T3 connection is only 45 megabits/second or the same as about 20 home Comcast connections. Here you do the math.. http://www.astragate.net/services/t3.htm Full T3 prices start as low as $2900.
Comcast can't provide over $100 worth of service while charging less than $100. They need to either raise prices, throttle 24X7 applications, cap monthly use, or drop the high bandwidth users. Comcast doesn't get the bits for free. A free flowing hole in the system by saturated leaks 24X7 is a problem for them.
You're absolutely right. I'm a Comcast customer who needs my upload bandwidth (such as it is) for my livelihood as a software developer.
Upload is not the only thing this will impact. Download speed is important also. When a new ISO of Linux is out, I would like to have a fast connection. If the upstream is clogged by P-P running 24X7, then I would not be able to get a quick download. Preventing the few from keeping the upstream connection saturated is good for my VOIP, web surfing, streaming media, and other things that would suffer packet loss, dropped connections and failed page loads. Comcast as a seller of VOIP understand the impact of saturated connections on the quality of their services. Instead of reducing everyone's bandwidth and increasing latency, they have decided to simply attack the applications that are sucking 2/3 of their bandwidth by less than 20% of their users.
Here's where your analogy fails: this commons isn't finite!
The money to buy bandwidth isn't either. Most people have no idea that Comcast has to buy bandwidth and think the answer is simply to upgrade equipment to handle more bandwidth. Buying the bits is the problem. There is a point where the bits used exceed many users contribution to the purchased bits.
Here is an idea of what ISP's pay for broadband. http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-bandwidth/0608/msg00015.html Buying a lot more bandwidth without gaining a lot more subscribers is not a money maker. Limiting the high bandwidth users enable your investment to serve more users. And... $8/meg isn't really a super great price... I deal with an ISP currently that has 700 meg committ to two different tier 1 carriers and pays slightly less... This person is asking for 10GE with an unknown commit but for 10GE it's usually at least 1 Gig for sure...
If you were an ISP and one user was using the same bandwidth as 200 other users combined, I'm sure you would be looking at options. Especially if the applications were spreading to the rest of the users so your number of high usage users grew like clockwork. It will be the time to decide to up the subscription cost 200X or limit high bandwidth use. Maybe just put the penalty on the non-profitable users so they will simply go elsewhere. Sucking a little water from the drinking fountain is fine. Connecting a fire pump and using the fountain for flood irrigation because the water is "Free and Unlimited" is not OK regardless of the free and unlimited claim. Home unlimited accounts were never sold for 24X7 saturated connections. When your ISP has to plumb for bigger pipes and buy the bits, they are getting sticker shock. They noticed the system is leaking large amounts of money to a few high demand users and the numbers of those users is multiplying. Taking no action is not an option, unless you consider simply canceling broadband service altogether as it becomes unprofitable.
How is it that universities don't get killed by the hogs on their lines, with much wider guarantees on their system?
The campus buys a limited amount of bandwidth that is shared by all users. At work I have 60 meg on my desk and it make Comcast seem like dial-up. When surfing on my break, I sometimes hit a page on an.edu domain. In the heyday of Napster, hitting a page on an.edu was about the same as hitting it with dial-up at home (I was on dial-up for a long time until I moved.) Ask any student if they think the school connection is fast compared to the broadband they have at home. Many schools do limit their bandwidth costs and often ban many high bandwidth use items as it brings the campus network to a crawl. Some schools have even published bandwith use charts showing saturation much of the evening hours. Saturation is not just slow connections, but lots of dropped connections, lost packets, collisions, etc.
This article is a little old, but deals with the early days of P - P and the effect it had on a university budget for bandwidth.
Oregon State University became concerned about the program before the RIAA suit, when systems administrators noticed that Napster was consuming 5 percent of the school's bandwidth. Napster activity could have pushed the school over its $75,000 yearly budget for bandwidth, says Oregon State's vice provost for information services Curt Pederson, noting that the school's bandwidth usage would double every 90 days if not controlled.
Comcast is dealing with this issue right now. Believe it or not, Comcast has to pay for Bandwidth use. This is the commons that is overused by the few. Dumping high usage is in their best interest as unchecked it will rob the system to the point of no longer breaking even.
Comcast, etc, attempted to pretend that it was in their advertising campaign by promising the impossible -- unlimited bandwidth. In a sane world, they contractually obligated themselves to bankruptcy
I don't want to go back to dial-up. Do you have a suggestion besides bankruptcy or the $300 or more a month option?
Agreed. It isn't okay if they're selling me an "UNLIMITED" plan then decide what the hell I can do with it. I've said for years that all these "content access providers" (sorry, they're not INTERNET service providers anymore) just need to stop with their crap. Where is the ISP that allows me unfettered, high speed access to the internet.
They made a mistake and offered the plan knowing in the day the typical usage of users. When high bandwidth P-P invaded the network and high bandwidth continued after the user left the chair in front of the keyboard, the drain on resources was like having unlimited (un metered) water to the house (I have had that) and decided to never shut off any water in the house at any time. As a bonus, I decide to add a fountain in the pond in the yard and leave it run. If we all did that with our unlimited plans, there would quickly be a shortage and the supplier will be by soon looking to plug a few leaks.
And is this an okay thing to you? Because it isn't to me. Or a lot of people.
Actually yes. Before the flame war starts, remember that bandwidth just like any resource is a commodity with an expense. This is the tragedy of the commons.
Supporting the mega bandwidth users prevents me from obtaining a $20/month plan. 2/3ds of my bill is to pay for the commons pool of bandwidth, not the surfing I do on Slashdot.
If everyone demanded and got and used saturated feeds 24/7, then the typical bill would need to be close to $600/month to provide the service. This is not alright with me. The compromise is either toss off the high usage customers (hidden cap), throttle after a certain amount (check Australia throttling), or go from an unlimited plan to a usage base plan just like cell phones. Pick one. Unlimited for all and growing demand is not going to cut it at current rates. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwidth_cap http://www.news.com/2100-1034_3-5079624.html
The overgrazing of the commons by the few is why fences are being erected to protect the commons from degrading. Now there is still a green patch when I arrive. The other option is per use pricing, or raising the price for all to expand the supply of the commons to meet demand.
Pick one... Higher prices for all Dropping high bandwidth users Capping users monthly bandwidth Throttling the one application which uses 2/3's of the system bandwidth
Eliminating the last one as an option will require one of the other ones to be used, otherwise the overgrazing of the commons by the few 24/7 torrent users will overuse the bandwidth requiring the purchase of more bandwidth. Guess who will get the bill. It's #1 on the list.
Peer to peer is growing. More computers are now using lots of bandwidth when there is no user planted in the chair in front of the keyboard. The ISP's are noticing the added expense for bandwidth and must do something. Do you have a suggestion? Supporting the growing load without adjusting service plans is not an option for remaining in business. ISP's know simply tripling the price for everyone is not going to cut it.
I download linux iso's daily, and legal torrents all day long.
You are one of the high use people Comcast would love to drop. You use the resources of about 200 regular customers.
comcast has literally done NOTHING in their long term plan to provide more bandwith speed. They want users who use no bandwidth when they are not directly between the chair and keyboard. They want users who pull a page ore email and stop to read it. They hate 24/7 saturated connections and will be glad to be rid of you.
But to find out if you're ready to let go is something you won't find out till you're at altitude.
True. However it is much easer to take the leap after much exposure to aircraft, jumping, firefighting, military service, etc than just out of the blue deciding to take up a offer from a newspaper to experience skydiving. Guess who is more likely to freeze when at the door at altitude.. It's not the guy who worked a year packing chutes or the guy with his private pilots license. By the time he reaches the door, he will be better prepared.
The more you study chemistry and hang out at the rocketry club, the sooner you will be ready to mix up your first sugar rocket. I learned to fly RC planes the same way. I hung out at the local flying field. Later I put together my first plane. With an instructor I trusted, I learned on a buddy box. Without this early training, I would have crashed on my first attempt and been afraid at the door to try again. On the contrary, I've kited a few but am ready to practice barrel rolls again. I am probably a better candidate now for a private pilots license.
Learning chemistry online and seeing projects go right and terribly wrong is part of the getting ready training. As in aviation, there are old pilots, there are bold pilots, but few old bold pilots. We like to watch bold pilots. We like to watch explosions. Air shows are popular, but they have more than their share of accidents. I am very unlikely to mess with being a bold pilot or mess with large explosions. I am likely to mess with both flying and explosions on a very small scale.
The basic idea behind a patent is to allow the patent holder "shelter time" to develop, market, sell, and profit from their new inventions.
If the patent holding company is late to the market, the product they could make will be severly nutered as the standard moves on and teh upgrades are patented by others. They may claim Wi-Fi Patents, but trying to use it to get into WiMax could be problematic as much of the progress is done by others. "Having developed the WiMax standard, Intel seems to have stolen a march on rivals like Fujitsu."
Guess who holds the patents on these new generation chips and the developed standards. Other than litigation for the small base idea, there is little left of the original design. WEP on 802.11b has been advanced by 802.11a, g, n, Radius, WPA, WiMax, etc.
The original patent may be of limited litigation value in the current generation of wireless networking. The phrase "Intel seems to have stolen a march on rivals like Fujitsu." could be a problem for Intel. Time will tell. Maybe they will get a cross patent deal out of it so they can manufacture WiMax adapters using Intel chips.
Good job... give the government a list of all the web sites and distributors they've missed and need to take down why don't ya:D --
The government is well aware of the Striesand effect. They are also aware of these sites. Many of the sites are used for entertainment, but when you attempt to buy large quanities of the materials, you may attract notice. A couple instant cold packs for your first aid kit is of no concern. Try to buy several truck loads of the stuff and I'm sure someone will have questions. The supply chain is already watching for unusual quantities sold. You might not notice they are watching when you go back for your 5th large order in a week, but you would have already spiked normal sales levels. The guy that bought 4 cold packs for the football season is normal. The guy back to buy another case this month is of concern.
Only someone who can hold a boiling flask of sulfuric acid without dropping it (because he knows what happens if he does) will succeed in a lab, and that not something you learn of the internet.
Knowing what happens is important. That info is also online. The MSDS for almost anything is online. The accidents from oversizing a reaction or under cooling to where it can no longer be controlled is online. Studying accidents is a way to learn the unexpected can and does happen. In the science room a small amount of Sodium in a beaker of water is impressive. Scaled up, it is outright dangerous. (Provided 2 links in grandparent). Other reactions that got out of control are online for your learning. For example, in the making of plastic, if someting downstream breaks and the chemicals are diverted to a reaction chamber, and the reaction is too big, people die.
Many of these events that were under reported in the 1960's is now online as well for study. The claim of dumbed down relates to cable tv science. Online the real data is out there if you care to find it.
I am not sure on the metals sodium and magnesium, but Borax, drain cleaner, Sulfuric acid, Hydrochloric acid, Chlorine, Salt Peter, and powdered sugar are all easy to find in local markets.
They care about kids having less and less of a chance to educate themselves and they care that kids curiosity isn't being fulfilled nearly as much.
With the internet, the kids curiosity is being fulfilled more often than not. The problem with the internet isn't the lack of information. It is the dilution with distractions. Kids are more likely to spend time on myspace than on one of the science pages. There is more information online now than was ever accessible when I was a kid.
Without a chemistry set, but with internet, I can find out where to buy components to build fireworks mortar shells, buy local explosive components (Nitride and oil) and such. It was the internet that taught me where to locally buy small amounts of Ammonium Nitrate and Salt Peter with no questions asked.
A trip to the hardware store is now an adventure as I read the ingredients on the packages.
I have learned more online than I could have ever learned from a chemistry set from the 1960's Not all is illegal or dangerous. Some is a lot of fun.
Could the fact that the home video market was almost non-existent in 1978 have been a factor in that decision?
The home video market wasn't there just like the retail online music market wasn't there when Creative released the RIO. There were bootleg shops, but no Blockbuster as the content providers were fighting rentals tooth and nail. They would rather sell copy protected copies for about $65 each then take royalties on rentals.
Lucas and Disney were in the Theatre only mode, no retail.. Know anyone who is refusing to release material to iTunes? It will appear in unprotected form for free.
There were lots of VCR's. It was easy to find someone to trade movies with. Video stabelisers to remove copy protection was the norm. Fast forward 20 years... They still haven't learned and are repeating history all over again. There are lots of video enabled players. There are lots of programs which enable ripping (removing protection) and most owners know others to trade with. Peer to peer online and offline are common. Why are we repeating history. Been there and done that.
The studio's (NBC) think their gold plated content will sell. At their prices a couple copies may sell. They could make more by trying for market penetration instead. Then they could sell advertising with their large base. High price and DRM are a vacuum generator which will be filled by other sources.
Historically, it's been notoriously hard to track down a computer that is not connected to the internet.
What computer would that be? From the summary, only WiFi is non-functional and there is a simple work around for desktop machines. I've been using it for WPA on any version of Linux for years. Use CAT5 to connect to an access point configured as a client. The AP takes care of all the driver stuff for you. You don't need the OS to be able to handle any of it. It works just like a wired network jack to the computer.
If you are on a budget, even on older Linksys Router running DD-WRT can run as a wireless client. The bonus is better range and it is easy to locate the antenna on a cabinet somewhere with good reception instead of buried under the desk behind a metal box somewhere.
I replied that it certainly seemed to be an intentional DNS routing issue on their end, and rebooting would be kind of silly.
Did you try using a non Comcast DNS server? Try using 4.2.2.1 (Verison) or another free server other than Comcast next time that happens. Delete the default settings in your router and plug them in. Reboot the computers to get new DNS info from the router and check it.
Not sure if this is anything, but I use Google Web Accelerator on Comcast at home. Lately, I have been getting a lot of DNS issues at home with it. When I take my laptop to school, I do not get any DNS issues.
Plug in another DNS server. May I suggest Verison, Open DNS, ScrubIT, or any of the other free DNS servers? I use ScrubIT as it is safe for work. As a bonus, most malware sites don't work. It keeps the AV software much quieter.
That's hardly Apple's fault, the content providers insisted Apple create their own DRM format.
They were hoping to divide the market into trivial failures and make all competing formats incompatible. They achieved that goal except for the de-facto DRM free standards of MP3, WMA, AAC, MP4, and the video counterparts. Now the incompatibilities have come to haunt them as one has taken the market. The move now for music is DRM free, but the studios are hell bent to follow the music industry into the DRM incompatibility problmes.
The studios should be limited to selling whosale to retailers such as Apple. Apple as a retailer has every right to buy wholesale from the market. As a retailer, they have every right to carry the video equivelant of Timex watches and not carry the Rollex line. NBC has every right to bypass the retailer and sell the Timex watches of their own brand and wonder why they can't sell them at Rollex prices. Maybe NBC content is "top rated" but still not going to sell at premium prices. Apple is not buying a half a product (half season). NBC appears supprised by the move. They shouldn't have been.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe all the students in the dorm could each claim they were the guilty party? ("I'm Sparticus!")
I like the idea. Even better, I like the idea that all MAC address belong to some Linksys router or another in the dorm. Beyond NAT, it could be anyone.
Comcast is trying to deal with it in a method (forged packets) that's a felony in 9 states, so they get very little sympathy there.
While competing with DSL, they are trying to avoid having to drop the unlimited from their advertising. They got caught. It would have been much better for them to roll out a new guaranteed high speed plan with a minimum monthly data transfer. After that, then the hogs can be throttled after X number of GB has been transferred. They can no longer offer unlimited accounts when too many 24X7 saturated users join the party and suck it dry.
If Comcast did that, they would again be in hot waster for their advertised unlimited service plan. They are caught between a rock and a hard place on this one. That would be the ideal situation as most users would have fantastic bandwidth most of the time. The downside is when people hit the cap, and think thier connection is broken, the constant calls to service would be a problmem. To do it properly, they would need to provide a usage meter for each customer. This is again another expense for Comcast. Metering and billing/limiting is an entire new expense infrastructure. With Peer to Peer, it's either throttling, dropping users who hog or metered internet. Doing nothing is not an option as the usage of automated large file transfers continues to grow.
It is time for Comcast to drop unlimited accounts and move everyone to a guaranteed monthly high speed data plan. Those who run over can have the options of metered additional bandwidth or throttling like they do in Australia.
The advantage for low bandwidth users would be the ability to get lower priced plans. This may enable more to move from dial-up to broadband, as the price of about $60/month is a little steep for many who just check a few web pages and use e-mail. Slashdot works fine on dial-up after you block immages and flash. I only got broadband at home because we have a family of 6 and it was tying up the phone line. An ISO could easly be grabbed at work as I had a 60 Mag connection to my desk. The cost of broadband and employer provided broadband at work is the reason many are still on dial-up at home.
A sweet connection is one where you are warned the download may take several hours, so you get a cup of coffee, and when you get back 10 minutes later, the transfer is done. With that connection at work, I don't need to pay for broadband at home, except for the family.
why am I not allowed to use it? Your rationale is that if I went to McDonald's and was sold a double cheeseburger, I shouldn't be allowed to eat the whole thing.
The same reason you can go to an all you can eat buffet and can eat all you can. If you bring in an automated eating machine with you that continued to eat 24X7 when you were no longer in the chair would be a problem in an all you can eat place. Unlimited was intended for while the space between the keyboard and chair was occupied. The automated 24X7 hogs are a problem on the supply side as they eat the resources that would otherwise feed about 200 other typical users. Buying the extra bits to feed this growing part of the population while not charging more for the entrance fee is the problem.
Putting a cap or asking them to leave are the only options to avoiding negative income. Simply ignoring the problem as more hogs show up is not sustainable and not an option.
Most users do not have an issue with paying for a service,
So why do you think a good part of the US is still on dial-up? The high cost of a broadband connection is directly the largest reason. High bandwidth users will pay the fee. For those who check for an email from the grandkids are fine with dial-up as they won't get their value out of it.
The ISPs made a mistake and should have sold bandwidth the same way cell phone plans do. An unlimited account should be priced in the $200-$600 range to cover the use by the high bandwidth users.
A T3 connection is only 45 megabits/second or the same as about 20 home Comcast connections. Here you do the math..
http://www.astragate.net/services/t3.htm
Full T3 prices start as low as $2900.
Comcast can't provide over $100 worth of service while charging less than $100. They need to either raise prices, throttle 24X7 applications, cap monthly use, or drop the high bandwidth users. Comcast doesn't get the bits for free. A free flowing hole in the system by saturated leaks 24X7 is a problem for them.
You're absolutely right. I'm a Comcast customer who needs my upload bandwidth (such as it is) for my livelihood as a software developer.
Upload is not the only thing this will impact. Download speed is important also. When a new ISO of Linux is out, I would like to have a fast connection. If the upstream is clogged by P-P running 24X7, then I would not be able to get a quick download. Preventing the few from keeping the upstream connection saturated is good for my VOIP, web surfing, streaming media, and other things that would suffer packet loss, dropped connections and failed page loads. Comcast as a seller of VOIP understand the impact of saturated connections on the quality of their services. Instead of reducing everyone's bandwidth and increasing latency, they have decided to simply attack the applications that are sucking 2/3 of their bandwidth by less than 20% of their users.
Here's where your analogy fails: this commons isn't finite!
The money to buy bandwidth isn't either. Most people have no idea that Comcast has to buy bandwidth and think the answer is simply to upgrade equipment to handle more bandwidth. Buying the bits is the problem. There is a point where the bits used exceed many users contribution to the purchased bits.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwidth_cap
Here is an idea of what ISP's pay for broadband.
http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-bandwidth/0608/msg00015.html
Buying a lot more bandwidth without gaining a lot more subscribers is not a money maker. Limiting the high bandwidth users enable your investment to serve more users.
And... $8/meg isn't really a super great price... I deal with an ISP
currently that has 700 meg committ to two different tier 1 carriers and
pays slightly less... This person is asking for 10GE with an unknown
commit but for 10GE it's usually at least 1 Gig for sure...
If you were an ISP and one user was using the same bandwidth as 200 other users combined, I'm sure you would be looking at options. Especially if the applications were spreading to the rest of the users so your number of high usage users grew like clockwork. It will be the time to decide to up the subscription cost 200X or limit high bandwidth use. Maybe just put the penalty on the non-profitable users so they will simply go elsewhere. Sucking a little water from the drinking fountain is fine. Connecting a fire pump and using the fountain for flood irrigation because the water is "Free and Unlimited" is not OK regardless of the free and unlimited claim. Home unlimited accounts were never sold for 24X7 saturated connections. When your ISP has to plumb for bigger pipes and buy the bits, they are getting sticker shock. They noticed the system is leaking large amounts of money to a few high demand users and the numbers of those users is multiplying. Taking no action is not an option, unless you consider simply canceling broadband service altogether as it becomes unprofitable.
How is it that universities don't get killed by the hogs on their lines, with much wider guarantees on their system?
.edu domain. In the heyday of Napster, hitting a page on an .edu was about the same as hitting it with dial-up at home (I was on dial-up for a long time until I moved.) Ask any student if they think the school connection is fast compared to the broadband they have at home. Many schools do limit their bandwidth costs and often ban many high bandwidth use items as it brings the campus network to a crawl. Some schools have even published bandwith use charts showing saturation much of the evening hours. Saturation is not just slow connections, but lots of dropped connections, lost packets, collisions, etc.
The campus buys a limited amount of bandwidth that is shared by all users. At work I have 60 meg on my desk and it make Comcast seem like dial-up. When surfing on my break, I sometimes hit a page on an
This article is a little old, but deals with the early days of P - P and the effect it had on a university budget for bandwidth.
http://scout.wisc.edu/Projects/PastProjects/net-news/00-01/00-01-25/0001.html
Oregon State University became concerned
about the program before the RIAA suit, when systems
administrators noticed that Napster was consuming 5 percent of
the school's bandwidth. Napster activity could have pushed the
school over its $75,000 yearly budget for bandwidth, says Oregon
State's vice provost for information services Curt Pederson,
noting that the school's bandwidth usage would double every 90
days if not controlled.
Comcast is dealing with this issue right now.
Believe it or not, Comcast has to pay for Bandwidth use. This is the commons that is overused by the few. Dumping high usage is in their best interest as unchecked it will rob the system to the point of no longer breaking even.
Comcast, etc, attempted to pretend that it was in their advertising campaign by promising the impossible -- unlimited bandwidth. In a sane world, they contractually obligated themselves to bankruptcy
I don't want to go back to dial-up. Do you have a suggestion besides bankruptcy or the $300 or more a month option?
Agreed. It isn't okay if they're selling me an "UNLIMITED" plan then decide what the hell I can do with it. I've said for years that all these "content access providers" (sorry, they're not INTERNET service providers anymore) just need to stop with their crap. Where is the ISP that allows me unfettered, high speed access to the internet.
They made a mistake and offered the plan knowing in the day the typical usage of users. When high bandwidth P-P invaded the network and high bandwidth continued after the user left the chair in front of the keyboard, the drain on resources was like having unlimited (un metered) water to the house (I have had that) and decided to never shut off any water in the house at any time. As a bonus, I decide to add a fountain in the pond in the yard and leave it run. If we all did that with our unlimited plans, there would quickly be a shortage and the supplier will be by soon looking to plug a few leaks.
And is this an okay thing to you? Because it isn't to me. Or a lot of people.
Actually yes. Before the flame war starts, remember that bandwidth just like any resource is a commodity with an expense. This is the tragedy of the commons.
Supporting the mega bandwidth users prevents me from obtaining a $20/month plan. 2/3ds of my bill is to pay for the commons pool of bandwidth, not the surfing I do on Slashdot.
If everyone demanded and got and used saturated feeds 24/7, then the typical bill would need to be close to $600/month to provide the service. This is not alright with me. The compromise is either toss off the high usage customers (hidden cap), throttle after a certain amount (check Australia throttling), or go from an unlimited plan to a usage base plan just like cell phones. Pick one. Unlimited for all and growing demand is not going to cut it at current rates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwidth_cap
http://www.news.com/2100-1034_3-5079624.html
The overgrazing of the commons by the few is why fences are being erected to protect the commons from degrading. Now there is still a green patch when I arrive. The other option is per use pricing, or raising the price for all to expand the supply of the commons to meet demand.
Pick one...
Higher prices for all
Dropping high bandwidth users
Capping users monthly bandwidth
Throttling the one application which uses 2/3's of the system bandwidth
Eliminating the last one as an option will require one of the other ones to be used, otherwise the overgrazing of the commons by the few 24/7 torrent users will overuse the bandwidth requiring the purchase of more bandwidth. Guess who will get the bill. It's #1 on the list.
Peer to peer is growing. More computers are now using lots of bandwidth when there is no user planted in the chair in front of the keyboard. The ISP's are noticing the added expense for bandwidth and must do something. Do you have a suggestion? Supporting the growing load without adjusting service plans is not an option for remaining in business. ISP's know simply tripling the price for everyone is not going to cut it.
I download linux iso's daily, and legal torrents all day long.
You are one of the high use people Comcast would love to drop. You use the resources of about 200 regular customers.
comcast has literally done NOTHING in their long term plan to provide more bandwith speed.
They want users who use no bandwidth when they are not directly between the chair and keyboard. They want users who pull a page ore email and stop to read it. They hate 24/7 saturated connections and will be glad to be rid of you.
But to find out if you're ready to let go is something you won't find out till you're at altitude.
True. However it is much easer to take the leap after much exposure to aircraft, jumping, firefighting, military service, etc than just out of the blue deciding to take up a offer from a newspaper to experience skydiving. Guess who is more likely to freeze when at the door at altitude.. It's not the guy who worked a year packing chutes or the guy with his private pilots license. By the time he reaches the door, he will be better prepared.
The more you study chemistry and hang out at the rocketry club, the sooner you will be ready to mix up your first sugar rocket. I learned to fly RC planes the same way. I hung out at the local flying field. Later I put together my first plane. With an instructor I trusted, I learned on a buddy box. Without this early training, I would have crashed on my first attempt and been afraid at the door to try again. On the contrary, I've kited a few but am ready to practice barrel rolls again. I am probably a better candidate now for a private pilots license.
Learning chemistry online and seeing projects go right and terribly wrong is part of the getting ready training. As in aviation, there are old pilots, there are bold pilots, but few old bold pilots. We like to watch bold pilots. We like to watch explosions. Air shows are popular, but they have more than their share of accidents. I am very unlikely to mess with being a bold pilot or mess with large explosions. I am likely to mess with both flying and explosions on a very small scale.
The basic idea behind a patent is to allow the patent holder "shelter time" to develop, market, sell, and profit from their new inventions.
If the patent holding company is late to the market, the product they could make will be severly nutered as the standard moves on and teh upgrades are patented by others. They may claim Wi-Fi Patents, but trying to use it to get into WiMax could be problematic as much of the progress is done by others.
"Having developed the WiMax standard, Intel seems to have stolen a march on rivals like Fujitsu."
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_17/b3930072_mz011.htm
"As early as Apr. 18, the company will start turning out a new generation of chips that it hopes will turn WiMax into the Next Big Thing in the wireless"
Guess who holds the patents on these new generation chips and the developed standards. Other than litigation for the small base idea, there is little left of the original design. WEP on 802.11b has been advanced by 802.11a, g, n, Radius, WPA, WiMax, etc.
The original patent may be of limited litigation value in the current generation of wireless networking. The phrase "Intel seems to have stolen a march on rivals like Fujitsu." could be a problem for Intel. Time will tell. Maybe they will get a cross patent deal out of it so they can manufacture WiMax adapters using Intel chips.
Good job ... give the government a list of all the web sites and distributors they've missed and need to take down why don't ya :D
--
The government is well aware of the Striesand effect. They are also aware of these sites. Many of the sites are used for entertainment, but when you attempt to buy large quanities of the materials, you may attract notice. A couple instant cold packs for your first aid kit is of no concern. Try to buy several truck loads of the stuff and I'm sure someone will have questions. The supply chain is already watching for unusual quantities sold. You might not notice they are watching when you go back for your 5th large order in a week, but you would have already spiked normal sales levels. The guy that bought 4 cold packs for the football season is normal. The guy back to buy another case this month is of concern.
Only someone who can hold a boiling flask of sulfuric acid without dropping it (because he knows what happens if he does) will succeed in a lab, and that not something you learn of the internet.
Knowing what happens is important. That info is also online. The MSDS for almost anything is online. The accidents from oversizing a reaction or under cooling to where it can no longer be controlled is online. Studying accidents is a way to learn the unexpected can and does happen. In the science room a small amount of Sodium in a beaker of water is impressive. Scaled up, it is outright dangerous. (Provided 2 links in grandparent). Other reactions that got out of control are online for your learning. For example, in the making of plastic, if someting downstream breaks and the chemicals are diverted to a reaction chamber, and the reaction is too big, people die.
http://home.att.net/~d.c.hendershot/papers/ccps10-02.htm
http://www.acusafe.com/Newsletter/Stories/0500News-Phillips.htm
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/US/03/27/plant.fire.03/index.html
http://shippai.jst.go.jp/en/Detail?fn=0&id=CC1000179&
Many of these events that were under reported in the 1960's is now online as well for study. The claim of dumbed down relates to cable tv science. Online the real data is out there if you care to find it.
What, no more ammonium nitrate, sodium pellets, and hunks of magnesium? Ah well, there's always mail-order.
Some stuff you can still get in small quaintness if you know what to look for. Take your first item.
Pick it up as this at any good first aid supply house.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_kind_of_liquid_is_in_instant_cold_packs
I am not sure on the metals sodium and magnesium, but Borax, drain cleaner, Sulfuric acid, Hydrochloric acid, Chlorine, Salt Peter, and powdered sugar are all easy to find in local markets.
They care about kids having less and less of a chance to educate themselves and they care that kids curiosity isn't being fulfilled nearly as much.
With the internet, the kids curiosity is being fulfilled more often than not. The problem with the internet isn't the lack of information. It is the dilution with distractions. Kids are more likely to spend time on myspace than on one of the science pages. There is more information online now than was ever accessible when I was a kid.
The internet is the great equalizer. I remember the old chemistry sets of the 1969's. They were pretty boring with a few things that changed color and kept matches from burning and such. Online the high power learning is great. I can now find the information to build rockets from Salt Peter and powdered sugar, how to mix explosive gasses (Spud guns propane air mix), create fun reactions (Mentos and coke) (sodium and water) and lots of other fun stuff I couldn't do with the chemistry set of the 60's. Some stuff that is too dangerous or illegal to do yourself, there are online videos for your enjoyment. There is more info in the following links than is in most chemistry sets.
http://www.burntlatke.com/
http://www.jamesyawn.com/candyrocket/
http://eepybird.com/dcm1.html
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_kind_of_liquid_is_in_instant_cold_packs
http://www.humeseeds.com/stump.htm
http://www.ufomind.com/area51/articles/1996/popsci_9604/
http://theodoregray.com/PeriodicTable/
http://www.theodoregray.com/PeriodicTable/Stories/011.2/
http://fullygeek.com/2007/01/20000-pounds-of-sodium-dumped-in-lake/
Without a chemistry set, but with internet, I can find out where to buy components to build fireworks mortar shells, buy local explosive components (Nitride and oil) and such. It was the internet that taught me where to locally buy small amounts of Ammonium Nitrate and Salt Peter with no questions asked.
A trip to the hardware store is now an adventure as I read the ingredients on the packages.
I have learned more online than I could have ever learned from a chemistry set from the 1960's Not all is illegal or dangerous. Some is a lot of fun.
But Lucas recovered!
But will NBC or RIAA Labels?
With Lucas, I can buy the original Star Wars for about the same price as the Blank tape my bootleg copy came on.
http://www.amazon.com/Star-Wars-Trilogy-Mark-Hamill/dp/B00004XPP0
T120 blank VHS tape at that time was about $15 each.
Could the fact that the home video market was almost non-existent in 1978 have been a factor in that decision?
The home video market wasn't there just like the retail online music market wasn't there when Creative released the RIO. There were bootleg shops, but no Blockbuster as the content providers were fighting rentals tooth and nail. They would rather sell copy protected copies for about $65 each then take royalties on rentals.
Lucas and Disney were in the Theatre only mode, no retail.. Know anyone who is refusing to release material to iTunes? It will appear in unprotected form for free.
There were lots of VCR's. It was easy to find someone to trade movies with. Video stabelisers to remove copy protection was the norm. Fast forward 20 years... They still haven't learned and are repeating history all over again. There are lots of video enabled players. There are lots of programs which enable ripping (removing protection) and most owners know others to trade with. Peer to peer online and offline are common. Why are we repeating history. Been there and done that.
The studio's (NBC) think their gold plated content will sell. At their prices a couple copies may sell. They could make more by trying for market penetration instead. Then they could sell advertising with their large base. High price and DRM are a vacuum generator which will be filled by other sources.
Historically, it's been notoriously hard to track down a computer that is not connected to the internet.
What computer would that be? From the summary, only WiFi is non-functional and there is a simple work around for desktop machines. I've been using it for WPA on any version of Linux for years. Use CAT5 to connect to an access point configured as a client. The AP takes care of all the driver stuff for you. You don't need the OS to be able to handle any of it. It works just like a wired network jack to the computer.
If you are on a budget, even on older Linksys Router running DD-WRT can run as a wireless client. The bonus is better range and it is easy to locate the antenna on a cabinet somewhere with good reception instead of buried under the desk behind a metal box somewhere.
I replied that it certainly seemed to be an intentional DNS routing issue on their end, and rebooting would be kind of silly.
Did you try using a non Comcast DNS server? Try using 4.2.2.1 (Verison) or another free server other than Comcast next time that happens. Delete the default settings in your router and plug them in. Reboot the computers to get new DNS info from the router and check it.
Not sure if this is anything, but I use Google Web Accelerator on Comcast at home. Lately, I have been getting a lot of DNS issues at home with it. When I take my laptop to school, I do not get any DNS issues.
Plug in another DNS server. May I suggest Verison, Open DNS, ScrubIT, or any of the other free DNS servers? I use ScrubIT as it is safe for work. As a bonus, most malware sites don't work. It keeps the AV software much quieter.
That's hardly Apple's fault, the content providers insisted Apple create their own DRM format.
They were hoping to divide the market into trivial failures and make all competing formats incompatible. They achieved that goal except for the de-facto DRM free standards of MP3, WMA, AAC, MP4, and the video counterparts. Now the incompatibilities have come to haunt them as one has taken the market. The move now for music is DRM free, but the studios are hell bent to follow the music industry into the DRM incompatibility problmes.
The studios should be limited to selling whosale to retailers such as Apple. Apple as a retailer has every right to buy wholesale from the market. As a retailer, they have every right to carry the video equivelant of Timex watches and not carry the Rollex line. NBC has every right to bypass the retailer and sell the Timex watches of their own brand and wonder why they can't sell them at Rollex prices. Maybe NBC content is "top rated" but still not going to sell at premium prices. Apple is not buying a half a product (half season). NBC appears supprised by the move. They shouldn't have been.
It would also be trivial to post it in formats compatible with the iPod.
What format that supports DRM do you propose? If you want DRM, I think Apple has the strings on that one. It's either iTunes or no DRM.