Re: Comcast to Cap Data Transfers at 250 GB in Oct

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Gordon, Aug 30, 2008.

  1. Gordon

    Gordon Guest

    On 2008-08-30, Bobs <> wrote:
    > Carnations wrote:
    >> Comcast to Cap Data Transfers at 250 GB in Oct
    >>
    >> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2329170,00.asp
    >>
    >> "" This is the same system we have in place today," Comcast wrote in an
    >> amendment to its acceptable use policy. "The only difference is that we
    >> will now provide a limit by which a customer may be contacted." The cable
    >> provider insisted that 250 GB is "an extremely large amount of data, much
    >> more than a typical residential customer uses on a monthly basis." ""
    >>
    >> Kinda makes broadband service here in NZ look rather pathetic don't ya
    >> think?
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Anyone who downloads that much data is obviously pirating anyway. That's
    > about 8 gigs a day.


    Once again Bobs your logic is flawed. You assume that one can download 8 GB
    per day.

    The point is, Comcast have raised the cap, bugger the bar, this has to be
    good. Why should there be a cap?

    A cap suggests that one can not download without the worry of bit hit either
    in the wallet or bandwidth speed. Let us leave the matter of legal or
    otherwise downloading out of this cap debaate, for one can download illegal
    material with a cap.
     
    Gordon, Aug 30, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 21:00:15 +1200, Bobs <>
    wrote:

    >Gordon wrote:
    >> On 2008-08-30, Bobs <> wrote:
    >>> Carnations wrote:
    >>>> Comcast to Cap Data Transfers at 250 GB in Oct
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2329170,00.asp
    >>>>
    >>>> "" This is the same system we have in place today," Comcast wrote in an
    >>>> amendment to its acceptable use policy. "The only difference is that we
    >>>> will now provide a limit by which a customer may be contacted." The cable
    >>>> provider insisted that 250 GB is "an extremely large amount of data, much
    >>>> more than a typical residential customer uses on a monthly basis." ""
    >>>>
    >>>> Kinda makes broadband service here in NZ look rather pathetic don't ya
    >>>> think?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> Anyone who downloads that much data is obviously pirating anyway. That's
    >>> about 8 gigs a day.

    >>
    >> Once again Bobs your logic is flawed. You assume that one can download 8 GB
    >> per day.

    >
    >LOL, wake up. That's easily done. I've done it myself. I imagine people
    >that use FTP for piracy can triple that.
    >
    >Think about it. On a 20/1 connection...that's about 1.8MB per second
    >from a server with enough bandwidth and a client near the exchange.
    >That's 108 megs a minute. Or 6.5 gigs PER HOUR. Even at a third of that
    >speed...say 2 gigs an hour. That's 48 gigs PER DAY. Or 1.5TB PER MONTH.
    >
    >>
    >> The point is, Comcast have raised the cap, bugger the bar, this has to be
    >> good. Why should there be a cap?

    >
    >Because pirates sit on FTP sites all day downloading 20 gigs a day.
    >We're not talking about torrent users here. We're talking about hardcore
    >pirates, which is what comcast is clearly targeting with such a cap.
    >There's no way average people are going to suck down 8 gigs per day on
    >average for legit use. Even with cretins like Puddle suggesting he
    >watched BSG from a website. Big deal...even a high def version is only a
    >gig. He'd have to watch 8 high def eps per day, EVERY DAY, for the
    >ENTIRE MONTH to reach such a cap.


    Wrong, an hour of 1080i HD content from TV3 on Freeview DVB-T is over
    5 Gibytes. You do not get HD for 1 Gibyte per hour. Even SD takes
    1.3 Gibytes per hour, as recorded off the air. There is a lot of
    downloadable programming out there that is originally sourced from HD
    transmissions, and says it is HD, but in fact has been compressed to
    less than SD quality.

    So 8 Gibytes is about 1.6 hours of HD programming. 250 Gibytes is 50
    hours.

    And, of course, 1080p HD is going to take much more, presumably about
    double.

    >>
    >> A cap suggests that one can not download without the worry of bit hit either
    >> in the wallet or bandwidth speed. Let us leave the matter of legal or
    >> otherwise downloading out of this cap debaate, for one can download illegal
    >> material with a cap.
    >>

    >
    >Because pirates that download a terrabyte of data are costing the ISP
    >money. If everyone downloaded a terrabye a month on their asdl2 or cable
    >connection....thr ISP would be brought to its knees. 250GB cap is a good
    >idea, because it wont effect 99% of the users...just the 1% of people
    >that abuse the system.
    >
    >I'm not a fan of caps myself. I'd rather be charge per GB like I said
    >previously. But a 250gig cap....that's huge. That's no restriction at all.
     
    Stephen Worthington, Aug 30, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Gordon

    impossible Guest

    "Bobs" <> wrote in message
    news:48b90f46$...
    > Gordon wrote:
    >> On 2008-08-30, Bobs <> wrote:
    >>> Carnations wrote:
    >>>> Comcast to Cap Data Transfers at 250 GB in Oct
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2329170,00.asp
    >>>>
    >>>> "" This is the same system we have in place today," Comcast wrote in an
    >>>> amendment to its acceptable use policy. "The only difference is that we
    >>>> will now provide a limit by which a customer may be contacted." The
    >>>> cable provider insisted that 250 GB is "an extremely large amount of
    >>>> data, much more than a typical residential customer uses on a monthly
    >>>> basis." ""
    >>>>
    >>>> Kinda makes broadband service here in NZ look rather pathetic don't ya
    >>>> think?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> Anyone who downloads that much data is obviously pirating anyway. That's
    >>> about 8 gigs a day.

    >>
    >> Once again Bobs your logic is flawed. You assume that one can download 8
    >> GB
    >> per day.

    >
    > LOL, wake up. That's easily done. I've done it myself. I imagine people
    > that use FTP for piracy can triple that.
    >
    > Think about it. On a 20/1 connection...that's about 1.8MB per second from
    > a server with enough bandwidth and a client near the exchange. That's 108
    > megs a minute. Or 6.5 gigs PER HOUR. Even at a third of that speed...say 2
    > gigs an hour. That's 48 gigs PER DAY. Or 1.5TB PER MONTH.
    >
    >>
    >> The point is, Comcast have raised the cap, bugger the bar, this has to be
    >> good. Why should there be a cap?

    >
    > Because pirates sit on FTP sites all day downloading 20 gigs a day. We're
    > not talking about torrent users here. We're talking about hardcore
    > pirates, which is what comcast is clearly targeting with such a cap.
    > There's no way average people are going to suck down 8 gigs per day on
    > average for legit use. Even with cretins like Puddle suggesting he watched
    > BSG from a website. Big deal...even a high def version is only a gig. He'd
    > have to watch 8 high def eps per day, EVERY DAY, for the ENTIRE MONTH to
    > reach such a cap.
    >


    Comcast is more forward-looking than you. Yes, today 250Gb/month sounds like
    a lot. But in a year or two, there will be internet channels capable of
    competing head-on with Comcast's cable channel for on-demand music and
    video -- so long as there are no restrictions on data downbloads -- and
    that's what Comcast is determined to stop.

    >>
    >> A cap suggests that one can not download without the worry of bit hit
    >> either
    >> in the wallet or bandwidth speed. Let us leave the matter of legal or
    >> otherwise downloading out of this cap debaate, for one can download
    >> illegal
    >> material with a cap.
    >>

    >
    > Because pirates that download a terrabyte of data are costing the ISP
    > money. If everyone downloaded a terrabye a month on their asdl2 or cable
    > connection....thr ISP would be brought to its knees. 250GB cap is a good
    > idea, because it wont effect 99% of the users...just the 1% of people that
    > abuse the system.
    >
    > I'm not a fan of caps myself. I'd rather be charge per GB like I said
    > previously. But a 250gig cap....that's huge. That's no restriction at all.


    Search back through nz.comp posts just a few short years ago and you'll find
    people claiming that 1Gb/month was excessive. Just because you can't now
    imagine it doesn't mean the demand isn't there.
     
    impossible, Aug 30, 2008
    #3
  4. Gordon

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Somewhere on teh intarweb "Bobs" typed:

    > gigs per day on average for legit use. Even with cretins like Puddle


    Ad Hominem, the sign of the intellectually challenged, /way/ out of their
    depth.

    <plonk>
    --
    Shaun.

    DISCLAIMER: If you find a posting or message from me
    offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
    If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
    me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... ;-)
     
    ~misfit~, Aug 31, 2008
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Michael

    Re: Comcast to cap newsgroup downloads?

    Michael, Jul 10, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    434
    Michael
    Jul 10, 2003
  2. Billh

    Re: Comcast to cap newsgroup downloads?

    Billh, Jul 10, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    644
    Billh
    Jul 12, 2003
  3. DZN

    255.250.250.239

    DZN, Dec 28, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    641
    Sky King
    Dec 28, 2004
  4. Randy Given

    Lens Cap Holder - Sima Cap Keeper

    Randy Given, Nov 25, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    39
    Views:
    3,627
  5. EMB
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    280
    Gordon
    Aug 30, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page