What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
My wife likes to take pictures of everything. Got any ideas? view!
bestbuy.com - With a Kodak(r) EasyShareTM 3X Zoom, she'll have impressive 10.2-megapixel performance, right at her fingertips
166 Comments
- OmegaWolf, on 10/30/2007, -4/+256Any attempt to restrict what people say and do online must be met with swift and blinding retribution.
- tpawloski, on 10/29/2007, -1/+93Tiered Plan? Don't we already pay for more higher bandwidth. We need more competition. AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, Cox, Time Warner. These are the big players, but are they in every neighborhood, no. Usually one or two providers are in a given community. What kind of choice do I have. I live in a rural area and Comcast or AT&T are the only high-speed providers available, and they both suck. We need connections like those in Japan. FCC get your head out of your A** and allow more access and push out the monopolies. The 700Mhz spectrum auction is going to be another failure, the Telecom companies are going to be the ultimate winners and they will end up restricting that market and we will start all over again.
- arbulus, on 10/27/2007, -1/+48Um, yes this is a net neutrality debate. When Comcast says "we don't like P2P so we're going to throttle or block that traffic" that's a neutrality issue.
- baalzebub, on 10/27/2007, -4/+48not everyone that uses BitTorrent is downloading illegal files, some people download Linux ISOs which would otherwise be impossible to obtain due to busy servers or a user has a slow connection and BitTorrent allows the user to pause/stop and resume downloads without data loss when available...
- Flaco, on 10/28/2007, -1/+43We need more people like this in the government.
- genome4hire, on 10/29/2007, -1/+38Find your congressman/woman's contact info here (http://www.congress.org), give them a call, and let them know what you think about Comcast's anti P2P practices.
- inactive, on 10/27/2007, -0/+35Why don't we actually call this guy and let him know how much we support him?
We're absolutely ready to call people and tell them we disagree with their views, I think we should call this congressman and let him know we AGREE. - MadN, on 10/27/2007, -1/+33Hmmm, what would happen to me if I sent forged network packets on Comcast's network?
Why are Comcast's workers who did this not in trouble? - blackmage439, on 10/29/2007, -2/+27I don't understand why the state of the Internet in this country became so far behind the rest of the world? Korea, Sweden, and Japan, to name a few, have astronomically better average speeds than the U.S. does. Is it greed from corporations like AT&T and Comcast? Is it the distance limitations? I think the general public really needs to hear the facts before Internet Neutrality fails, and Congress signs away our rights to view what we want on the Internet. I'll be damned if I have to pay a higher price for the same ***** bandwidth, just to have the freedom to view information on the PUBLIC Internet!
- KMartSheriff, on 10/27/2007, -0/+24Now this is news I can get behind! Dugg!
- tempusrob, on 10/27/2007, -1/+25It's not that uncommon. It was pretty much the only way to get the Ubuntu release earlier this month. Bilzzard uses BitTorrent to distribute patches.
Obviously these pale in comparison to all the piracy going on, but the point is that there are legitimate uses here. Something like 90% of email is spam, but the ISP's aren't stopping any of those packets, ya know? And God knows how many zombied boxes are on their network that are contributing to a DDoS as we speak, yet go untouched and the customers un-notified. - TriZz, on 10/27/2007, -0/+21...I think this is the first time that I'm actually proud to be from (Northern) Virginia.
- tempusrob, on 10/27/2007, -0/+18Yeah, but what the ISP's mean by "tiered" is different... and scary. For example, the "Basic" tier might give you basic WWW, SMTP, and IM support. The "Intermediate" tier might give you support for streaming media and online gaming. And the "Advanced" tier would give you full access to the 'net ... maybe.
- ivandir, on 10/27/2007, -0/+15I just sent a letter to my senator. Nothing else I can do now, but if at least 10% of the diggers here do the same we might get somewhere.
- KloroFormd, on 10/27/2007, -1/+13I believe it deserves another mention. Not everyone sits on digg for 10 hours straight.
- sacherjj, on 10/27/2007, -0/+11So did Comcast filter it or what?
- drimo, on 10/27/2007, -2/+13Just go ahead and say ass... oh wait, we are talking about the FCC here, so we might get a fine for saying a naughty word! Our country is so ***** up!
- sacherjj, on 10/27/2007, -0/+10Net Neutraliy. "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
- jgzman, on 10/26/2007, -1/+11I recommend marshmallow Pirate Attack. http://tinyurl.com/38ybax
Or seven large Italians with billy-clubs. - Double0Doug, on 10/27/2007, -0/+10I was sleeping 10 hours ago, sorry.
- barbobot, on 10/27/2007, -1/+11How about battlestar galactica? How about WoW patches? There are plenty of legal reasons to use torrents, it's just a protocol like http, the only difference is it's very good at distributing large files to many people. Just because he only said one reason why it is legitimate doesn't mean it's the only reason.
- Gaulven, on 10/27/2007, -0/+9You could interpret that two ways. What Comcast is doing is restricting what I'm doing online, but I hesitate to get the government involved. I'd love to just pick a different ISP. But what's the alternative when Comcast is the only option in your area?
This sucks all around. - badenglishihave, on 10/27/2007, -1/+10"Harper was somewhat skeptical of the importance of this issue to most consumers. He noted that Comcast is not blocking BitTorrent downloads but rather only the sharing of files--something that is not viable to most users."
Yet another person who doesn't understand how bittorrent works. bittorrent = downloading+uploading (sharing, anyone?) This guy is the "director of information policy studies" at Cato Institute. He should learn a little more about BT before he starts making calls like that. - WorkingDead, on 10/27/2007, -0/+8I think the best options are at the local level. Get involved in local politics. Start taking you freedoms back there. This is a perfect example of what eminent domain was designed for. I would rather let anyone in my neighborhood be in control of my ISP than Comcast. The cables are paid for by your tax money, buried in your yard, and attached to your computer. Just take them back. This is also why the OLPC project is so important. If things keep going the way they are, wireless mesh networks will be crucial for unfiltered communication.
- hexydes, on 10/27/2007, -4/+12Pics or it didn't happen.
- GuyeNoir, on 10/26/2007, -0/+7"I agree that this is probably what some big name providers have in mind, but I don’t think they will ever be able to enforce it. There would be technologies in place in an instant to beat these restrictions."
Yeah, and then they'll lobby to make said technologies illegal. And then only outlaws will have full access to the internet. - Rommel102, on 10/26/2007, -3/+10No one owns the internet. This is akin to your phone company automatically giving you a busy signal when you call someone even if they aren't on the phone because they (the phone company) doesn't want the call to go through. And the manner in which Comcast is doing this is in all likelihood illegal under many state laws that prevent any individual or company from impersonating another individual or company.
- lordbeef, on 10/31/2007, -0/+7In Utah the government stepped in (despite comcast's best lobbying efforts) and created the Utopia fiberoptic network ( http://www.utopianet.org/ ). This is a 15mbit symmetrical connection and I have my choice of four different ISPs to use it with.
The first one I signed up with was throttling bittorrent, but thanks to real competition I was able to switch to another ISP with no blocks of any sort.
I'd advise people to contact their congress to see if something similar can be created in your state. - Trevahaha, on 10/31/2007, -0/+7Here's how you can contact him directly: http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/?id=607
- MrWhite7, on 10/26/2007, -0/+6Why not contact your ISP instead? Everyone wants to cast a vote isntead of altering their spending.
- jcims, on 10/26/2007, -1/+7My brother is currently doing build-outs for TV and 100mbps internet access over the phone, tons of fiber getting laid all over the country. The problem is this stuff takes time... I'm currently watching a 10 mile stretch of fiber get buried along a small rural highway. It has been going on for months, but every couple hundred feet they either need to bore under a private driveway, go aerial over a waterway, bore under a road, etc. It's extremely expensive, and just takes _forever_ to reach any reasonable level of population. Look at the frustration caused by FiOS...it's only available in a very small number of locations. What if AT&T started marketing 100mbps internet access but *(only available in Tacoma, WA).
It will get better, but it may take five years to get there. - joshhan, on 10/27/2007, -0/+6Ever hear of leechers? BitTorrent in itself doesn't REQUIRE you to upload as much as you download. It's the preferred method and courteous, but hardly mandatory.
- Nicksname1, on 10/26/2007, -2/+8Sure it was.
- inactive, on 10/27/2007, -0/+6Yeah, but it Utah...
- metapop, on 10/26/2007, -0/+6an immediate and bloody death
- abooth413, on 10/26/2007, -0/+6for those unfamiliar with Net Neutrality.. or just want a good reminder with a little humor built in.. Hodgeman explained it best on The Daily Show: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB2Xnu9xQVU
- MasterFunk, on 10/27/2007, -2/+8But you paid for that 6mb/364kb bandwidth! You should be able to use it how you see fit. If comcast wants to setup a capped, bittorrent free service, that is fine. Just advertise it that way! But I do expect to pay less for it compaired to a non-capped service.
- physivic, on 10/27/2007, -0/+6holy *****, disregard my comment about 'this guy [being] a smart one' above. From the CNET post:
"Unfortunately for fans of Net neutrality, the congressman said he was not ready to go down this path and instead stressed market-based methods of fixing the problems. Instead of tinkering with packets, the congressman said that in the short term, Comcast should "simply tier their offerings and engage in a pricing structure that allocates more bandwidth to those who pay more, and less to those who pay less."
so there you have it: instead of standing up for Net Neutrality, congressman monkeybrains wants to 'propose' a tiered internet structure that they *already have.* he wants to appear to be a consumer advocate, and CNET seems to be buying it. So they're lame, too, at least today. can anyone else feel their BS detector going off!?
and WTF is a "fan of net neutrality?" someone who doesn't want to have free traffic shaping thrown in with cheap packaging? leave it to cable companies to make the internet as retarded as TV packaging! "market-based" means nothing when you're not insisting it all has to be traffic-neutral. They don't seem to comprehend that either b/c if they did, the article and his statement wouldn't be so self-defeating. - inactive, on 10/26/2007, -0/+5I'm much more comfortable with tiers based on up/down limits as this is tied to their expenses. If you all remember this is how things were originally (sort of).. you paid per hour or minute of internet access. If history is correct, everyone will move to unlimited access so long as the government stays out and consumers have control.
- jpt62089, on 10/26/2007, -0/+5I am in pretty much the same boat... But I do have one alternative to Comcast... ATT... Not much of an alternative :P I don't want to get a $300 bill when my house burns down!
- Trevahaha, on 10/27/2007, -1/+6Make sure you thank Congressman Boucher for his efforts. You can send him a message at: http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/?id=607
- Rabid_Llama, on 10/27/2007, -3/+8Comcast is completely within its rights. They're being jerks about it, rather than, say, offering some kind of nominally higher fee per-month to allow for unlimited torrenting, but it's their right as a private company. The government needs to stay the hell out of the internet.
- PhillAholic, on 10/26/2007, -0/+5Every time the government steps in to protect it's people under circumstances that it doesn't understand things go badly. It's clear to just about everyone that there are less then a handful of members of congress that understand anything outside of e-mail, google and maybe Instant messenger. Yea sure it's important that companies like Comcast stop doing this, but if you allow the US government to get involved, the results will probably be much worse. Just look at how they are handling other issues like wiretapping, and all these executive orders. If you think for a second that they will sit back and just stop the telecoms from tiering the Internet your in denial.
- PoeticDevice, on 10/27/2007, -0/+5This is exactly what I am thinking-- "Comcast is actively sending out false data onto its network, which impersonates its customers' computers and deceitfully convinces them to terminate BitTorrent connections." --I'm almost positive there's a couple laws that breaks.
- reddikilowatt, on 10/26/2007, -0/+5No, no one owns the protocols that make up TCP/IP. There are lots of people who own networks who loosely agree to peer traffic for each other. You guys all seem to think that you can have it both ways... "Don't regulate the Internet (unless my ISP decides to do something I don't want)." You REALLY don't want this. Anyone who remembers $0.35/minute long distance and having a "choice" of a heavy black or princess phone knows what government regulation will bring.
- Colindean, on 10/26/2007, -0/+5Contact your /state/ congresspeople, folks. One would think that individual states would be able to handle this faster than the federal government, and asking the federal government to handle it would be just one more thing they've got their noses in.
- lowerlogic, on 10/27/2007, -1/+5i think he means Comcast users can only leech
- MrWhite7, on 10/29/2007, -6/+10This government enforced net-neutrality cracks me up. The governments been subsidizing telecommunications monopolies for 50 years. Now you want it to come in and save you from a problem it created? You give our Federal Government the right to regulate the Internet EITHER through Net-Neutrality OR under the auspices of Homeland Security and the freedom of the internet is done. In exchange you'll be able to keep your bit-torrent... for awhile. It always starts off "lLet me protect you" and turns into "Stop resisting or else I can't protect you"
- littlespy, on 10/26/2007, -0/+4i pay for 6mb/364kb cable in morgantown, wv and i only get 0.5 mb downstream and when i play games i get over 200 ping. comcast is the worst, if they had verizon here i'd get it in a heartbeat!
- inactive, on 10/27/2007, -1/+5Don't you know? gasoline flames.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 166 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is