But I'll say it again, since this is a near identicle repeat of an earlier post. Whether you are going over the average does not matter a whit. What ISPs look at when they decide who to give these warnings to is how you are affecting those around you.
See, if you were on a line all by yourself, or with only a dozen or so people, you could freak out and download everything off the net. They don't care. You aren't going to affect the performance of those other 12 people.
However, if you are on a node that requires you to use less (re: not enough hardware to support the subscribers) you are expected to play nice and throttle your download/uploading.
Of course, this only applies if A) You are using cable, not DSL, and B) You weren't given an actual Byte-limit per month.
By not specifying just how much is 'too much' (and they never will, ever, no matter who you talk to) they can arbitrarily impose download limits on those they need to in order to keep their overused nodes from being discovered by the average user, who would otherwise only notice a small drop in performance.
Disclaimer: I know this, because I've seen the internal memos, and done the actual statistical work using the tools at my workplace, and confirmed the findings with other workers from my, and other, ISPs.
Comcast has a limit. It is unspecified. Right now, there is a movement within the ISP to send letters to users who are using 'excessive bandwidth'. And I do agree with them, almost. Actually, not at all.
See, the whole "it's always on" thing doesn't apply. It's NOT unlimitted. We don't know what the limit is. We aren't told. We aren't allowed to know. Customers are not allowed to know what this 'limit' is unless they go over it. Do you know why? Let me tell you why.
Because this limit only applies to those who are in an area where there are a lot of people. If you are on a headend with very few people, you can download to your heart's content, because it just won't affect that many customers. If you try to do the same amount of activity on a node that already has too many users - UH OH! You're being excessive!
So, by not naming a limit, they can impose one as they see fit - not by your actual usage, but by how you work as a unit within your geographic area.
Working for Comcast (though not for much longer) gave me some interesting insights into ISP mentality.
Comcast does the same thing. Their software comes preloaded with spyware. Broadjump, I think it's called. It's been a while, but when I worked for them, we were not allowed to say anything regarding spyware or spyware removing, either. I find it quite amusing.
How do they know of any long-term effects this virus might have? I imagine it would take at least a few years to observe any feasable side-effects. Am I wrong?
Aaah hahaha. Pahahahhahahaha. Ooooooh my... PAHAHAHAHAHA.
Oh MAN, I... I JUST LAUGH MAAHAHAH WMwmahahahahahaha, can't... PAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA. It with... with the... and update... PAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA.
There was no specific event, no. It has been happening ever since people found ways to pirate music/software. First software, I believe. It's been getting more and more important for companies to protect their products.
First came CD keys for online play.
People came up with CD key generators.
Why? It's not to fight back against The Man, it's cause they want free software.
Copyprotection right on the CD itself.
Protection emulators (www.daemontools.org, I believe, is a good one, or any other disc image emulator). Again, it's not so you can emulate your favorite CD without having to switch CDs. The main purpose is so you can have a virtual CD of a game/program you may or may not own. It's an unspoken truth.
The same with those game cracks you'll download. In the.nfo files, that little disclaimer that makes the software pirates seem like reasonable guys by saying "Buy the software! We did!" Yeah, and then you gave it away for free along with detailed instructions on how to make sure this illegal copy works. Great way to support the developers.
More protections came up, more people helped crack them. I mean, there are good crackers and there are bad crackers. Good crackers are like Ritz and President's Choice. Bad crackers are those guys who make it harder for software creators of any sort to make money.
So, it seems a pretty natural progression from my point of view. The "Man" is saying, "Okay, you want to play hardball, we'll play hardball." Bang, DRM comes into play.
The same as always, it's the few ruining it for the many.
Of course, it's not all one sided. Bad business practices, muscle flexing of niche markets, unneccesary distrust of the public... They're all factors too. But do NOT fool yourself into thinking DRM was purely some kind of evil scheme to Get Your Money.
I'm just curious; I'm not very political in the head. But it makes me wonder, honestly, about politics when I read things such as this. Who, exactly, informs people in power of technical details? Is there a department that specializes in informing people in power of the What's-What of computers? Do they just listen to anyone who wants to yammer at them and assume they're telling the truth? The big question I'm getting at is: Who tells the Governor about the difference between Windows/Linux/Mac/Solaris/etc, in terms of price/impact/uses/etc?
Destroying the computers is suposed to be a symbol of... what? That spending too much time in front of the PC will make you FLIP OUT and kill your PC? Or is this more akin to bra burning? But then, that doesn't make any sense, either. I really don't see how watching people wreck their hardware is suposed to make younger people less addicted.
Yeah, I would have to agree with this post. I don't really see why anyone should bark about not being able to connect to private servers. You don't go to DisneyWorld and bitch at the ride-operators because you can't use your Six Flags tickets.
Slashdot Mirror
See, if you were on a line all by yourself, or with only a dozen or so people, you could freak out and download everything off the net. They don't care. You aren't going to affect the performance of those other 12 people.
However, if you are on a node that requires you to use less (re: not enough hardware to support the subscribers) you are expected to play nice and throttle your download/uploading.
Of course, this only applies if A) You are using cable, not DSL, and B) You weren't given an actual Byte-limit per month.
By not specifying just how much is 'too much' (and they never will, ever, no matter who you talk to) they can arbitrarily impose download limits on those they need to in order to keep their overused nodes from being discovered by the average user, who would otherwise only notice a small drop in performance.
Disclaimer: I know this, because I've seen the internal memos, and done the actual statistical work using the tools at my workplace, and confirmed the findings with other workers from my, and other, ISPs.
"A little tape, and a lotta patience goes a long way, get the picture?"
See, the whole "it's always on" thing doesn't apply. It's NOT unlimitted. We don't know what the limit is. We aren't told. We aren't allowed to know. Customers are not allowed to know what this 'limit' is unless they go over it. Do you know why? Let me tell you why.
Because this limit only applies to those who are in an area where there are a lot of people. If you are on a headend with very few people, you can download to your heart's content, because it just won't affect that many customers. If you try to do the same amount of activity on a node that already has too many users - UH OH! You're being excessive!
So, by not naming a limit, they can impose one as they see fit - not by your actual usage, but by how you work as a unit within your geographic area.
Working for Comcast (though not for much longer) gave me some interesting insights into ISP mentality.
Don't the Japanese already have one? What do the Japanese have that the US does not, to allow them to create a MagLev?
Comcast does the same thing. Their software comes preloaded with spyware. Broadjump, I think it's called. It's been a while, but when I worked for them, we were not allowed to say anything regarding spyware or spyware removing, either. I find it quite amusing.
How do they know of any long-term effects this virus might have? I imagine it would take at least a few years to observe any feasable side-effects. Am I wrong?
Aaah hahaha. Pahahahhahahaha. Ooooooh my... PAHAHAHAHAHA. Oh MAN, I ... I JUST LAUGH MAAHAHAH WMwmahahahahahaha, can't... PAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA. It with... with the... and update... PAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA.
There was no specific event, no. It has been happening ever since people found ways to pirate music/software. First software, I believe. It's been getting more and more important for companies to protect their products. First came CD keys for online play. People came up with CD key generators. Why? It's not to fight back against The Man, it's cause they want free software. Copyprotection right on the CD itself. Protection emulators (www.daemontools.org, I believe, is a good one, or any other disc image emulator). Again, it's not so you can emulate your favorite CD without having to switch CDs. The main purpose is so you can have a virtual CD of a game/program you may or may not own. It's an unspoken truth. The same with those game cracks you'll download. In the .nfo files, that little disclaimer that makes the software pirates seem like reasonable guys by saying "Buy the software! We did!" Yeah, and then you gave it away for free along with detailed instructions on how to make sure this illegal copy works. Great way to support the developers.
More protections came up, more people helped crack them. I mean, there are good crackers and there are bad crackers. Good crackers are like Ritz and President's Choice. Bad crackers are those guys who make it harder for software creators of any sort to make money.
So, it seems a pretty natural progression from my point of view. The "Man" is saying, "Okay, you want to play hardball, we'll play hardball." Bang, DRM comes into play.
The same as always, it's the few ruining it for the many.
Of course, it's not all one sided. Bad business practices, muscle flexing of niche markets, unneccesary distrust of the public... They're all factors too. But do NOT fool yourself into thinking DRM was purely some kind of evil scheme to Get Your Money.
In the case of Japan, there is much porrution in the air and water. Lecycuring matelials is very important.
I'm just curious; I'm not very political in the head. But it makes me wonder, honestly, about politics when I read things such as this. Who, exactly, informs people in power of technical details? Is there a department that specializes in informing people in power of the What's-What of computers? Do they just listen to anyone who wants to yammer at them and assume they're telling the truth? The big question I'm getting at is: Who tells the Governor about the difference between Windows/Linux/Mac/Solaris/etc, in terms of price/impact/uses/etc?
Destroying the computers is suposed to be a symbol of... what? That spending too much time in front of the PC will make you FLIP OUT and kill your PC? Or is this more akin to bra burning? But then, that doesn't make any sense, either. I really don't see how watching people wreck their hardware is suposed to make younger people less addicted.
Yeah, I would have to agree with this post. I don't really see why anyone should bark about not being able to connect to private servers. You don't go to DisneyWorld and bitch at the ride-operators because you can't use your Six Flags tickets.