What is Digg?282 Comments
- albiniak, on 10/19/2007, -6/+494Dear Comcast,
***** you.
Sincerely,
Your customers. - x00x, on 10/19/2007, -3/+141Could Comcast face legal action? Oh, please, God, please..
- BrandonMills, on 10/10/2007, -5/+125Thanks to Comcast, my internet connection is Comcastic! ( It blows. )
- devzer0, on 10/10/2007, -7/+97World of Warcraft uses torrent to do updates. Comcast is really cutting off WoW???
- Langford, on 10/10/2007, -1/+90Comcast is perfectly happy selling bandwidth to you and accepting your money, as long as you don't actually try to use the connection for any activities that actually require the bandwidth they sold you.
- andrew522, on 10/10/2007, -3/+84I feel sorry for all the comcast customers out there who are getting screwed up the ass, because they pay like 50$ a month for a 6mb connection and can't torrent (linux, of course...) at all.
thankfully enough I have an ISP that doesn't filter or block (Insight) but its only a matter of time until the rest of the major companies fall in line with comcast. - noblepaladin, on 10/19/2007, -0/+78Unfortunately, Comcast can just say "***** You" to all their customers and most of them won't leave. Many of the Comcast service areas have zero competition, so unless their customers want to go back to dial up, they must live with Comcast. In areas that have competition (FiOS areas, for example), Comcast has been able to miraculously offer 16M/2M speeds to compete whereas in their monopoly areas they only offer 8M/768kbps at most because "they don't have enough bandwidth".
- cduquette, on 10/19/2007, -3/+62I'd love to see Comcast get screwed for this. It's time for the US government to start protecting it's citizens instead of defending its corporations at the expense of the people. It seems like many companies today are abusing their power (RIAA, MPAA, Viacom, Verizon, AT&T, Microsoft, Apple, etc.) in order to complete their agenda.
- DreKor, on 10/10/2007, -3/+60Aside from being covered by a ToS agreement, Comcast won't face legal action because that would require a legal system which understand the Internet to be something other than a series of tubes.
- listrophy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+42It's not so much that we, the customers, despise Comcast (or Charter in my case). The problem is that Comcast/(insert your cable company here) hates you... or rather the concept of you. As far as cable companies are concerned, they are looking for the optimal income: number of customers x rate charged. If you can increase that rate without losing an inversely proportional number of users, the cable company will do it.
In other words, rates are independent of costs. Rates are dependent on screwing us out of the maximum amount of money. This particular problem of rates-independent-of-cost would EASILY be resolved by the simple introduction of market competition. - arbulus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+39You mean just like the insurance industry?
- arbulus, on 10/10/2007, -2/+39If you mean by eliminating local monopolies that ISPs have and getting more than one ISP into any given locality, then I am all for it. For far too long have I had only one option for ISP. It's ridiculous. No particular company has a national monopoly, but they have monopolies in individual locations. Where I live, you get Charter, that's it. If you don't like what they do, then too bad. And it's that way in most areas, only Comcast or only Cox or only a local provider. Sometimes you find that you can get a cable provider or a DSL provider, but that's not often.
The reason they charge so much and treat you like ***** is simply because they can because you have absolutely no other option. That needs to end. - zombiedepot, on 10/10/2007, -10/+46We can only hope.
- scabbers, on 10/10/2007, -0/+29The people who they're impersonating to send faked RST packets didn't agree to Comcast's terms and conditions.
- kurttrail, on 10/10/2007, -1/+22Cool! Comcast is giving all it's customers a legal reason not to be found guilty when sued by the **AA for distribution.
- squirpy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+21ludicrous speeds maybe?
- MikeFromAmerica, on 10/10/2007, -3/+21Impossible. You can't kill that which has no life.
- stealthc, on 10/10/2007, -0/+17There are plenty of legitimate uses for BitTorrent. I haven't downloaded a Linux ISO in ages, but ISO images for other types of content. I recently downloaded a DVD for a political campaign that a volunteer was giving away. I used the Torrent to save him bandwidth costs.
Just because it's transferred over p2p doesn't mean it's illegal. I still think that the only reason movies and music are pirated over p2p so much is that the publishers aren't giving the consumers what they want: easily portable, full ownership of the content they buy. I subscribe to eMusic.com because I like being able to reliably buy mp3s, and be able to do whatever the heck I please with them. - NikoKun, on 10/10/2007, -1/+18In IL... all of the cable companies... are SO alike... that I almost don't see ANY difference at all, besides their names... -_- And there is never more than 1 cable company per area... ***** Monopoly... They all work together to insure we the consumers are screwed, and that cable prices can remain high... -_-
Is true competition too much to ask for? - miles32, on 10/10/2007, -0/+16They've gone plaid
- masona3, on 10/10/2007, -0/+16They're not blocking downloads but they ARE blocking uploads, asshat.
- unfuckwithable, on 10/10/2007, -4/+20Bah, no they're not.
"Forging" reset packets? That does not mean they're criminally impersonating someone. I love watching law practiced so earnestly by amatures. I'm aware of no legislation that criminalizes masquerading as another IP address. I'm aware of quite a few legitimate uses for it, one of which would be QoS.
This is such a technical issue, getting into the minutae of IP, that they're not even going to care how it was done. The focus will be on the why, not the how. In this case Comcast was using technical measures to ensure QoS. There might be cause for civil action, but the article didn't discuss it.
Bottom line? Don't be disingenuous with your reasons behind arguments. You object to this not because you are being impersonated, you object to this because it impacts your ability to use a particular program. - Altotus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+16Forging IP reset packets would be illegal in several states. A number of states have laws prohibiting interference with communications networks that would apply. You're right in that it's not forgery, but I don't think that anyone has asserted that. Depending on the state, establishing connections or sending communication via a telecommunications network that would falsely identify the source of the communication is against the law. I don't recall the exact wording of the federal statute, but I do believe that in that case this too would be an infraction.
The law doesn't care about QoS, and one could claim that spreading viruses or doing DoS attacks are technical measures too, but they are also actionable. As far as the law is concerned -- does the activity impact telecommunications and the use of the network? In doing so, does it attempt to hide the origin of the activity? In doing so, does it adversely affect the operation of a system not operated by the party engaged in the activity? Is the activity intentional? A judge would also likely ask (rhetorically) if a response in kind would objectionable to the same party (i.e., if Comcast users started doing the same thing to Comcast systems, what would be the response). - llbbl, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15Yea or in my case their only competition is sucktastic DSL from ATT and IMO they are worse with the gov spying and all.
- robisfunky, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15 Oh, snap! Well played, arbulus.
- MISDIREK7ED, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14^ Leech.
- jeffeb3, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15yeah right, who is going to pay for that? Don't you know you need to have at least half the money as the other guy to get something done. Congressmen are not cheap.
- yodaj007, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15How can you be sure Comcast isn't spying on your traffic?
- adml_shake, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13Comtastic and Comcast are going to be the new internet terms for ***** up the ass. "Dude we just got comcasted on that deal" "Comstastic, that about sums up what happened to those guys."
- listrophy, on 10/10/2007, -5/+18Why does everyone claim to be seeding linux ISOs? Is that some sort of l33t-speak for downloading movies?
Use torrent for legitimate uses! Revision3 is a prime example. Then, when you suspect your ISP of throttling, you can make a claim without fear of a DMCA suit. - brufleth, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14I'm surprised this isn't a bigger issue with politicians. I understand that the companies throw money around and no doubt help maintain the status quo but this isn't just nerds using the internet. Those same companies offer crappy TV packages that cost too much too. Maybe it is because most people can get directTV instead of cable if they really want.
- Tippis, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13...most popular pod/vid/whatevercasts are have torrents.
- ubuwalker31, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12@Fkr3:
You can't have a contractual private legal agreement which breaks public criminal laws. So, for example, you can't enter into a contract to murder somebody...and by extension, you can't enter a contract to impersonate someone's identity. Weak analogy, but you can now see why your argument is (mostly) fallacious. - TheSaladMan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12Have you tried turning it off and on again?
- BobOki, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12No, Blizzard uses torrents to HELP with its pacthing, to offload some bandwidth onto users to help ensure everyones speeds are good. If you cannot connect to the torrents, it still gets its patches from their servers directly.
- rebopper, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10DirecTV requires having credit, and a large deposit. Comcast will just hook the service up; no questions.
- cayle, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11please dont give them more dumb ***** ideas...
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10"If filtering one protocol that a small number of people use (yes, small - compared to http or ftp), allows the network to stay up for everyone else, then in a business sense, it's worth it to them so they dont have to upgrade their network connections."
That's what they said about minorities too. We also aren't talking about filtering, this is impersonating your computer, also known as spoofing I believe.
I'm not paying $xx a month so that Comcast can decide what network traffic should and shouldn't be allowed for me. - kermit4karate, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10If the contract says it's a 6mb connection, then it should be a 6mb connection. Period. Corporations are able to enforce TOS and contract violations against customers who violate terms, so why isn't Comcast being held responsible for violating their contract (the one clearly implied through their marketing) with their customers?
I'm not a heavy torrent user at all, but I see this as a case of a company simply not wanting to deliver on a service it has committed to delivering and has received payment for delivering.
And I don't buy the financial hardship argument - that Comcast can't afford to allow a small group of torrent users to ruin their network for everyone else. Hogwash. Comcast isn't hurting for money. It's not as if they can't afford to deliver the service they're being paid to delvier. If this were you or I, we'd be held responsible for delivering upon the service we said we'd deliver. As it is, the bandwidth we here in the US get compared to the bandwidth users in Japan, South Korea, etc., get is garbage.
Comcast is trying to weasel out of their obligations for purely financial reasons, to not be forced to spend money expanding their infrastructure, keeping up their profits. That's fine, but a deal's a deal. People should get what everyone understood they were getting when they signed up. Screw the fine print in Comcast's 40-page TOS. Their commercials don't say anything about small print.
The law should stop letting hugely profitable corporations get away with screwing the little guy just because they can afford armies of attorneys who specialize in writing 40-page misleading TOS agreements written entirely in "small print." - Optimus, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11Bring on the corporate apologists!
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Naturally, We should also filter all non porn www usage as lets face it, its what the majority of the customers want.
- da_bradler, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10it's a known fact that ToS agreements don't mean ***** if the ToS in of themselfs are illegal, you can't have a ToS agreement that says they own your first born, even if you do scroll down and click agree it doesn't mean they have any legal rights. any lawyer with a marginal amount of skill can destory any ToS you may have signed
- badjoke, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10I love this new synonym.
"God, let's get out of here guys. This bar is comcastic." - AggieFalcon01, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10Silly Comcast users ... don't you realize 57-story skyscrapers aren't cheap?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comcast_Center_(office_building)
Now go back to watching American Idol re-runs. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10You should see the size of the new Comcast building in Philly. That's where the all money is going.
- MxM111, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Sometimes it would really help if people say if they are sarcastic or not
- dezmd, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9In Chicago I can still torrent ubuntu isos with little issue (seeding and downloading), at 10mbps+, on comcast, so likely its a 'pilot' filtering program that doesn't affect everyone (or maybe its just b/c I'm not downloading loads of movies/tv shows/etc that keeps my torrents running smooth).
Cheers. - kurttrail, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8The article CLAIMS that 25% of US internet traffic is torrents. That is hardly a small amount of traffic.
- enthreeoh, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8I use comcast and seeding works only while downloading, once downloading finishes seeding stops. This combined with their powerboost scam really makes me wish they'd get a nice slap from some arm of the government but I doubt it'll happen.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9That's nothing when you're trying to seed a 3.5GB file, and Comcast throttles it from seeding. It also sucks even with Encryption on. I used to upload at 45kb/sec and now I hardly ever hit 20, even on TorrentLeech torrents.
I ***** hate Comcast ever since they took over Houston. -
Show 51 - 100 of 279 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is