What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Adam Lambert sings the 2012 theme song, “Time for Miracles” view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Watch the Adam Lambert music video for the 2012 theme song. See 2012, in theaters Nov 13
256 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15If there's a limit, it should be stated. Period.
You should not be booted for going over a non-existant/ non-public limit. - gumby013, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10That comes to about 250kB per second for the entire month.
- Spaztic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9The problem and lawsuit that is soon to follow is because there is no limit to downloads...if Comcast wants to impose limits on customers download bandwidth then it has to be stated somewhere...
- equusdc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Their terms of service (I HAVE COMCAST) DO state VERY clearly that you are NOT guaranteed ANY amount of transfers or speed, that you are absolutely forbidden to run ANY kind of server or public access point and that "excessive" use WILL be punished this way, that they DO run QoS shaping and that if you want an account without these limitations, you should purchase the handy $100/month business plan where you DO have guaranteed speed and are specifically allowed to use every available bit of it to do whatever the hell you want provided it isn't criminal.
ALL of that is in the ToS, so can we stop pretending it isn't or am I the only one who actually read it? - double0shithead, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9The whole point of this story is that they advertise unlimited usage. But then they boot you when you take them up on it. That's just wrong. Why doesn't comcast just say - 600GB/mo max. It's not like that would deter customers. It's just effed up that he gets booted for breaking an unwritten rule.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Comcast also said they would reinstate his account, but another incident like this one would result in a 12-month suspension.
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15581427
Oh no, a company enforcing a reasonable policy! Ooooh! - bombtrack, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Is it unlimited access? Then he has every right to this. Specify your bandwidth limitations. I'm sick of these companies and their ambigious advertising.
- aa3000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"I'm glad I don't live in that guys neighborhood"
As long as he did not uncap his modem, it should not affect anyone. Comcast should provide enough badwidth for EVERY person to download this much without any loss in speed. - merreborn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Their service is advertised as 4 megabit/sec.
According to google calculator,
4 (megabit per second) = 1.25395958 terabytes per month
So, he used half the advertised bandwidth.
It'd be fine if they said, "For $50 a month, you get 4 megabit/sec, with a 500 GByte/month limit", but they don't. - seattle98104, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5what game uses up 600gb of bandwith in less than a month?
- RobotCitizen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4There is no such thing as "excessive excessive" unless it is clearly defined in the EULA. I'm not a Comcast user so I haven't read their EULA, but if it doesn't clearly say "X gig/month allowed, with penalties for surpassing said limit" (or words to that effect) then all of you who are crying "excessive" are just stating baseless opinions and talking out of your asses.
It is not a consumer's fault for holding a company to its promise.
If the EULA does clearly state a bandwidth limit, then the user is wrong and there is no controversy about it. - Katana, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7If your getting this much stuff a month, you should get a dedicated line, not a consumer line.
- roadup, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Homer: All you can eat. Ha!
Attorney: Mr. Simpson, this is the most blatant case of fraudulent advertising since my suit against the film "The Never-Ending Story''. - mrhahn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Read the TOS you agree to when you sign-up. Most ISPs can take action if you're affecting their network or other users - especially if you're on cable.
- Mr.Glass, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4no limit means no limit, and the correct thing would be to split his neighborhoods line, not dump him.
average of 250Kb a sec, not that extreme. - Cronus6, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I agree, if there IS a cap/limit they should tell you.
If they don't tell you up front then the 1st time you go over the 'secret' cap/limit should earn you a warning, go over again and get booted.
That said... Holy Crap 600 Gig is a lot! I wonder what his upstream traffic was? - Brak710101, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Comcast has the right to do this. 600GB is way to much for someone on a subscriber line. I can barley hit 30GB with my BT servers always on.
I think this guy also might have hacked his modem's config files, 600GB would take a awful long time even on Comcast's HSI PLus account - perral1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3As much as I feel that 600 Gb should get you booted, it is unfair to boot people without stating limits beforehand.
- peekpoke, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The original user has posted a response a short while ago, here it is:
I made the original post in order to inform the users of this message board about my experience with Comcast and their invisible bandwidth caps. I was also hoping for some useful suggestions on how to best handle the situation. I did not post the message with the intent of complaining about Comcast, even though they have invisible and unstated caps, which if exceeded, are handled very harshly.
I did edit the original message. Originally I stated that my usage was 672 gigs. I edited it to “over 600 gigs” when I got home that night and found that my internet connection had not been restored. I felt that a Comcast employee could easily determine my identity given the information in the post. Since I have no other broadband options, I do not want Comcast to take action against me for posting on this board.
Since the original post I have done several things.
1) I have started using my neighbor’s wireless network for the 2 wireless PCs in my house. I have my neighbor’s full approval to do this.
2) I am adding a second cable modem for the largest bandwidth user in the house. I called Comcast and this is completely acceptable to them. In fact they are going to give me the $19.95 rate on the new modem for the first 6 months. I asked about a higher level account, but the 8 meg account is the highest level that I can get at my house.
3) I have cut my account back from an 8 meg to a 6 meg account. What is the point of having a faster connection if I can’t use it?
4) I have cancelled my Comcast cable TV and my Comcast telephone. It makes no sense to give money to people that treat me like this unless I have no choice.
5) I am installing bandwidth monitoring software on all of the PCs attached to my cable modems. I will monitor the usage and try to stay under 200 gigs a month.
6) I have password protected my wireless access point.
7) I am notifying the Attorney General, the FCC, the FTC, the State Utilities Commission and (as soon as I figure out who to contact) the branch of local government that has granted Comcast the monopoly on broadband where I live. If you have any useful ideas who else to contact. please let me know.
8) I have stopped using my Comcast email accounts and switched to Gmail. By using their web based email access, you are seriously inconvenienced when they suspend you account!
A lot of people have made a lot of assumptions regarding my employment, my sexual activities, my financial position and the legality of my online activities. None of which were addressed in my original post. In almost every case the assumptions have been wrong. I use the internet mainly to monitor my Ebay auctions, surf the web and to send and receive emails. Hardly high bandwidth items.
As far as I can tell, the majority of the bandwidth use in my house comes from several users doing legal P2P sharing and from other neighbors using my unsecured wireless network. I never really cared if they used it, but Comcast is going to cap my usage then I guess I’ll have to limit access to my network.
I have had several discussions with the Comcast abuse people since my account was suspended. They have been courteous and as helpful as possible. But several of the things that they have said may be of interest to you.
First off, they said the 672 gigs is 30 times the national average for bandwidth usage and that 672 gigs puts me in the top ½ of 1 % of users in the country. Secondly, they will not disclose the cap. They have said that I must reduce my usage “substantially” or they will suspend my account for 12 months, but they will not give me a number. I asked if 600 gigs was the magic number and was told “no – you have to reduce it much more than that”. When I asked if 300 gigs was OK, they said “I can’t tell you”. I said “how about 200 gigs?” and again they said “I can’t tell you”. Finally I said “100 gigs?” and the rep said “I can’t tell you – look, I’m just doing my job”.
Anyway, I now have my Comcast bandwidth restored and I know the rules – kind of. But I now have to walk on eggshells about using the internet. They have utilized their monopolistic position to turn something that was sold as unlimited (except for the rate at which I could use it) and have turned it into a Kafkaesque situation where there are unwritten rules with serious consequences. - CosmicJustice, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7He should get booted. No Digg.
- mikedpirone, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4That must be some pr0n collection he has.
- eclectro, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Yup. He probably was hosing the connection of all those around him. No digg.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8So let me get this straight. Somebody downloads a massive amount using up large bandwidth, some of which probably affected some other users. Comcast acts correctly and boots the dude. So.. uh I should digg this because??
- SystemsGuy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Get real - if you sell me a 4mb connection, and then boot me when I use it, whilst selling it as unlimited?! That's stupid. Want to prevent it? Do exactly what every provider every where else in the world does, and sell the line with a cap.
I currently have a 28/1.5 consumer ADSLv2 line. Do the math. 600GB is nothing, start thinking in TB. - AdamCo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm glad I don't live in that guys neighborhood.
- microdude431, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Yea, but it wasnt stated, which makes this wrong.
- systemmaster, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4They talked about this problem in the recent TWIT. Comcast advertises unlimited bandwidth and promises speeds it can't deliver. Why should a paying customer get booted for what they are entitled to? If Comcast can't handle it then they should ask the FCC to easy up on regulations. Maybe then the US can catch up with Asia and Europe, hell Canadians get better speeds then much of the US.
- tpoc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2What if I download 599GB?
- jtown, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Having an unspecified limit and unspecified penalty for exceeding the unspecified limit is absolute BS. DirecPC did this back in the late 90s and it cost them hundreds of thousands in legal fees. Basically, they switched from unlimited access (which is exactly what they advertised at the time) to an undisclosed system of throttling people who downloaded "too much" data.
Of course, they told nobody what they were doing in the beginning. Not even tech support knew about the new throttling system. They'd go through the standard troubleshooting steps. By the time troubleshooting was done, the throttling would have automatically lifted and they wrote it up as "solved". Eventually, a few people figured out exactly what was happening through trial and error and sued them. What they were doing was pretty ballsy.
You'd get a "bucket" of download credit. How much credit you got depended on your service plan. If memory serves, it was 30something megs for the 200kbps plan, 70something for the 400kbps plan, and something higher for commercial. On the 400kbps plan, you could download a little over 70 megs of data at 400kbps. Once you hit that mark, you were out of download credits and throttled back to around 56k. Your connection still worked but only at the speed of an old fashioned modem. Stop using it and your credits filled back up at the speed of a 56k modem. Let it sit for an hour and you'll have about 18 or 19 megs of credit and you could download that much data at 400kbps before getting throttled. Sit for about 4 hours and your credit is maxed again. In the beginning, an affected user would call tech support and sit on hold for 15 minutes, go through another 15 minutes of troubleshooting script, then try to download the 4 meg "test" file from DirecPC's website. By the time they got to the download test, enough credit had built up to download it at full speed. "Problem solved!" Customer confused but somewhat satisfied. The first time...maybe the second...possibly the third. But, eventually, a pattern becomes evident.
Imagine having to determine that by trial and error, comparing notes with other subscribers, slowly building a picture of what's going on while the company continues to deny that there's anything wrong on their end. And continues to advertise and sell "unlimited" accounts.
What they were trying to do wasn't evil but the way they tried to hide it was just plain stupid. Eventually, they paid 6 figures to the class action lawyers, probably more to their own lawyers, and offered a buyback program to people who got screwed. Oh. And finally disclosed the details of the Fair Access Policy. Only took 2 years in court.
http://fairaccess.direcway.com/
By refusing to disclose their method of determining who is an "abuser", Comcast is heading down the same path. - jasqwerty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2There is no set limit, but PLEASE OH PLEASE read your TOS contracts fools. It's plainly stated that at their discretion, they can say you're using too much.
I love that fact that a while ago telcos realized that businesses pipe through more data than consumers, and so they could charge business for true pipes while 99.9999% of their residential users are quite happy with simply how fast the pipe is, and thus don't pipe as much through either. I'm happy that I can get 10MBPS for $39.99/month.
I like having my internet connection be snappy, but have intention to ever pipe through more than 20GB a month. It's an implicit understanding I have with the ISP, and in some ways it's also directly codified in the TOS agreement. Listen, you want to be an ass and do this, that's fine. Buy a fractional T-3 line, which for about 10MBPS, runs you $2k/month, and they'll be more than happy to route your traffic, maxed out, 24/7. - fletchowns, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2BTW 600GB is nothing if you have usenet and have access to a nice private BT tracker.
- GuineaPig, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3That's a lot of porn. This guy better be careful. That much dry friction, and he's going to ignite his crotch.
- systemmaster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Straight from Comcast:
"Acceptable Use Policy: You expressly agree not to use the Customer Equipment, Comcast Equipment or the Service, directly or indirectly, to undertake or accomplish any unlawful purpose or in violation of any posted Comcast policy applicable to the Service, including without limitation any Comcast Acceptable Use Policy (the "AUP") or other policy posted on the Service's web site at www.comcast.net or on another web site about which you have been notified."
Nothing about bandwidth usage
"Prohibited Uses of the Service: Use of the Customer Equipment, Comcast Equipment or the Service for transmission or storage of any information, data or material in violation of any federal, state or local law or regulation is prohibited. In addition, unless you are subject to a Service plan that expressly permits otherwise, the Service is to be used, and you expressly agree to use it, solely in a private residence, living quarters in a hotel, hospital, dormitory, sorority or fraternity house, or boarding house, or the residential portion of a premises which is used for both business and residential purposes. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Service is for personal and non-commercial use only and you agree not to use the Service for operation as an Internet service provider, a server site for ftp, telnet, rlogin, e-mail hosting, "web hosting" or other similar applications, for any business enterprise, or as an end-point on a non-Comcast local area network or wide area network."
Again nothing about bandwidth usage
"Bandwidth, Data Storage and Other limitations Use of the Comcast network infrastructure in a manner that (i) exceeds the then current bandwidth, data storage or other limitations on the Comcast High-Speed Internet service or (ii) puts an excessive burden on the limitations of the network. Examples include: Using the Comcast network to run a Web-hosting server or any other commercial enterprise."
Well look at that, you advertise unlimited usage and then say it can be deamed excessive.
Advertise unlimited + contractual limitaion(which is not on the signed contract) = fraud/deceptive practices
And that is against the law. - lukas88, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1600GB is out of control, especially when they share bandwidth. Comcast should be able to stop excessive downloaders but still say "unlimited downloads". They probably warned the guy, since comcast has done that in the past before imposing bans. Look at it this way, restaurants have all-you-can-eat buffets, but if someone was eating most of the food so that others didn't get enough, he would be kicked out. Even comcast has limits imposed by the physical world, bandwidth doesn't just grow on trees.
- equusdc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Spiodoman: 231k/s isn't that fast off a cable connection"
Uhm... 600GB...see the BIG "B?" The one that means BYTE? Speed is stated in BITS per second. In this case, he used 4.8 trillion of 'em. There are 2.6 million seconds in a month. The correct math to get his constant b/s is 4.8T/2.6M.
That number is 1.85 Megabits per second. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Still, it shouldnt matter what you download. The principle of it is what he wants to get out. Telcos need to state a limit in the contract. You can go ahead and look at your contract and most likely there will be nothing stating a bandwith limit.
Anyways, i dumped comcast and got fios :D - partialinfinity, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ISPs get around the unadvertised bandwidth limit by stating in the TOS that you cannot operate your computer as a public server. Something like BT may be considered a publicly accessible service.
- CyberSmackdown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Netflix would have dropped his ass down to modem speeds for being unprofitable.
- j0keR, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wow, some people here are total dickwads. While most of us will agree that the bandwidth he used was probably excessive, there should be some sort of notification that there is a limit or a warning when he reaches it. A simple "sorry, you're SOL" cut-off is bad business. True, they were probably costing Comcast more than they were giving with their monthly payments. But think people. Business are not out for your best interest, people. I know some people here would like to say that this guy was taking advantage of Comcast-- well tough *****. They are a BUSINESS. Comcast is a monopoly that abuses the population with their unregulated and immoral business practices. They screw more people than they probably ever will get screwed back.
I really think that if you stand back for a moment, and actually realize how much we're being overcharged in comparison to every other country, you'll see things my way. Either they need to make their rules clear or we're not going to play by them. - craigtheguru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm a comcast customer and if they pulled this crap on me based on secret terms I'd contact the local media. That said, 600 GB on a consumer line is somewhat excessive. But I don't think Comcast should do anything unless it is explicitly mentioned.
As said above, 250 k/s downstream is hardly egregious, and if he wants to use his service 24/7 he should be able to. In fact Comcast offers faster download rates so why shouldn't I be able to use my line to the fullest? - samdu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Screw cable. I've got 6Mb DSL and never have to worry about this kind of stuff. And why all the vitriol? Suppose Comcast decided arbitrarily (which is how they arrived at the 600GB figure) that 20GB/mo was excessive and didn't state that in their TOS? Would you all still be supportive?
- odin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2i cant believe that more people dont download lots of ***** here. i can burn through 600 gigs, no problem. I dont give a ***** about my neighbors, and if my cable company boots me, ill get DSL. their loss. if the cable company cant handle it, too ***** bad.
- peerk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This should be a reason to GET comcast.
That is around 239 KB/s. - Lynxpro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1
Why the hell would anyone side with Comcast on this one? They are the ones selling to the public how much faster their cable modem service is compared to DSL. They are the ones that claim a certain download speed yet rarely meet it. And now they dump this guy for allegedly downloading too much? Well, its arbitrary. They haven't set a limit. So they only have themselves to blame.
Let us not forget that Comcast has been tampering with Vonage customers in an effort to hurt Vonage's business and siphon their customers off for Comcast's own VoIP'ish telephone service that costs a lot more than Vonage. Comcast is no better than the telcos trying to sponge more money off the likes of Google.
May commercial/municipal wifi wipe out Comcast. And they can take AT&T with them too. I'd much rather write out a check to Google for ISP services than these jokers. Hell, if I can get AOL's broadband for $25 a month over Comcast's lines, then I'm dumping Comcast. Frak them all the way to Kobol. - hoowahman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I use like 320 GB on good months. That guy is addicted and needs to get a life anyway.
- Hyperion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1From the guy's own website (http://www.livewxradar.com/comcast.htm):
"Well, I found it. One of the kids (14) got a userid/pwd from his friend to a USENET service. The program used was called newsbin. They installed it over the Christmas holiday. 375GB was what was listed as downloaded.
Most of it was freaken cartoons from overseas. Apparently to make matters worse when there was a corrupted archive, they re-downloaded stuff.
I gotta tell ya, this little program uses the connection to the fullest. I fired up a download and it stood steady at 6Mbps.
Instead of BASHING Comcast, I should be praising them for having a great network. No time did anything in here lagged or anything.
I just thank God they took an interest in Kira and Hiem and not some of that other wonderful stuff that ends up on USENET."
Haha, too good. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I wanna know how much storage this guy had.
But aside from the practicality aspect, what's wrong with downloading 600GB a month? He wasn't booted because of what he was downloading, but stimply because he was using that much bandwidth.
My problem is that the telecom companies have been given MILLIONS in tax cuts and benefits from the federal government because they promised us a huge increase in the quality of our broadband infrastructure. That was years ago, and we've seen nothing of it. Comcast should quit with the greed and increase their QoS, since that's what the government's paid them to do. *****.
As far as you guys bitching about him download 600 GB in a month...seems to me that one account like that won't affect many people. Even 20 or 30 accounts like that wouldn't be noticeable. A few hundred, sure. Even if you think that's too much bandwidth for him to be using, you've got to consider that Comcast offers speed, not bandwidth, meaning that they can handle much higher loads than a slow, constant download totaling 600 GB. - thidranki, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1what happened to this article? it dropped off the homepage
- alevel27mage, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I download probably around 80-150GB/month... 600 is insane, but very possible (without going over 8Mb/sec) using Usenet.
Seriously, Usenet > BitTorrent. - zoltan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11 - it is UNLIMITED right? 2. who cares 3. i doubt all his neighbors were horribly infllicted
-
Show 51 - 100 of 256 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is