What is Digg?100 Comments
- UtahPirate, on 02/26/2008, -4/+92So... Comcast hides its activities (which would normally be considered hacker-style "man-in-the-middle" attacks), and now claims it has a right to. And nobody thinks this is evidence that they knew this was wrong?
- nlke182, on 02/26/2008, -11/+56Comcast seems to be even more evil then Scientology. Onward anonymous, show them who the true internet hackers are.
- smackkmonkey, on 02/26/2008, -0/+39The video of the FCC hearing should be seeded on Bit Torrent
- inchrnt, on 02/26/2008, -2/+34Comcast's use of packet inspection seems far worse than bandwidth throttling or peer resets. Wiretapping is illegal (or supposed to be) so why isn't packet inspection. Internet traffic contains much more sensitive and private data than a phone conversation.
- NeoSporin, on 02/26/2008, -7/+39/b/ isn't your personal army
- Langford, on 02/26/2008, -0/+32It's good it's being looked at, but it troubles me that the judge didn't seem to understand. I get the impression that the judge thinks the internet is just web pages.
- XDataBurn, on 02/26/2008, -10/+39Comcast is fail.
- 89vision, on 02/26/2008, -1/+15Seeding torrents takes up a lot of bandwidth and will slow your internet down like a *****.
- Drgn547, on 02/26/2008, -0/+14well this is concerning news... considering Comcast is the only available broadband ISP where I'm moving
- magamiako, on 02/26/2008, -0/+12The issue comes down to what Comcast advertised versus what we as consumers received. We did not opt into the service assuming there was going to be arbitrary limits on what we were doing with our connection. Nor did we opt into allowing them to "forge" data traveling down the wires.
And what "alleged" activity? I highly doubt their torrent throttling has much to do with any RIAA/MPAA requests nor does it have anything to do with the information involved. Torrents are used for a variety of legitimate purposes including linux ISO distribution, game patch distribution, and so forth. World of Warcraft uses torrents primarily for its distribution of game patches.
What Comcast is doing is essentially killing off a client's ability to use their connection that they pay for. If I pay for 16Mbit/2Mbit with no advertised limit on the top side, it's reasonable to assume that I'll be able to use that to its full advantage at all times for any traffic I want. - mllawso, on 02/26/2008, -0/+11We get it, digg's new algorithm is weird. We don't need to be told every time it becomes apparent.
- diggrim, on 02/26/2008, -0/+11it's the best use of taxpayer dollars...rather than paying for hosting!!!
- smacksaw, on 02/26/2008, -1/+9I'm waiting for the ISP who offers "unfettered, unlimited internet access that is not routed through FISA wiretaps"
Let the free market reign on that one. Except that AT&T would probably pull a Monsanto/rBST and sue if someone did offer a better alternative. - britishrob, on 02/26/2008, -0/+8Agreed. Seems to be the case in many tech related cases. The judges are often 70 yo dinosaurs who have no clue to how the internet really works.
All they have to do is come up with some deceitful anaologies and they win the case - some rubbish like "the internet is like tubes, we're just unblocking them" - dupswapdrop, on 02/26/2008, -1/+8So the test is if I did this I would goto jail as a hacker. But comcast does it and it's good for business and the internet in general. Thank you comcast you really are craptastic!
- willfe, on 02/26/2008, -1/+7Well, unless you throttle/limit your BitTorrent client's upload speeds... keep it at 80% of your total uplink speed, or lower, and you'll be fine.
- magamiako, on 02/26/2008, -0/+6That's what it is like for everyone.
- DeathfireD, on 02/26/2008, -0/+5Actually it's more then just seeding now. As soon as any traffic is shown to be of the torrent protocol your Internet will craw to dialup speeds even when setting your throttle speeds down to something very low and limiting it to one or two downloads at a time. This also varies depending on where you live too so some people are seeing it much worse then others.
- confusednazgul, on 02/26/2008, -0/+5Same here. =(
- magamiako, on 02/26/2008, -1/+5For someone who claims to understand network security you should immediately be able to determine what Comcast is doing is not "hacking".
What Comcast is doing is more or less a denial of service attack. - 1randomnumber, on 02/26/2008, -0/+4You can get around the crappy connection by forcing encryption, or running your bittorrent through a proxy. That's what I've had to do for my connection, I used to have insight, but THE SAME DAY I got the letter saying Comcast was buying out insight, my bittorrent stopped working until I encrypted the data.
- emmeron, on 02/26/2008, -0/+4If you live too far away from a DSL hub, you might as well have dial-up.
- Hewolf1982, on 02/26/2008, -0/+4I have the same problem. My Internet was recently changed from Insight to Comcast. Back when Insight was in charge, I got a call telling me they didn't mind me downloading torrents, but I just had to limit my upload to 60 kbs which I complied to. Everything worked fine
However, now that Comcast is in charge within minutes of turning on Utorrent my Internet connection slows to a crawl. I can still download and upload torrents, but other than that my connection is worthless. I wish I could change to another ISP, but there is no other available in my area. - gusevx, on 02/26/2008, -0/+4The way I see it, is if Comcast can get away with this, then personal hacking should become less of a crime. If a company of 25000 can do it, why can't one person?
- yunus, on 02/26/2008, -0/+3my options are Comcast, Satellite, and dial-up. They can send me a list telling me how they screwed me. It doesn't mean I can do anything about it. Satellite sucks I'm not switching to it.
- CoolWind, on 02/26/2008, -0/+3This kind of interference is despicable. I truly hope the FCC stops these practices. One of my broadband providers interfered with my service to such a degree that Skype wouldn't work satisfactorily.
- magamiako, on 02/26/2008, -0/+3As long as there's money involved, nearly anyone has a price.
- cgravines, on 02/26/2008, -0/+3Comcast has been limiting my newsgroups connection. I used to get above 1000 kbps, then it was capped at 700, now its at 400.
- Jemulov, on 02/26/2008, -1/+3Comcast consumed ZD networks (TechTV) and shat out G4. In my eyes, that's just as bad as Scientology. Sure Scientology has actually killed people, but Comcast destroyed my gateway to techsavviness in 2003 and I've had to wait until a year ago for the internet to teach me.
- chiefbttlwshr, on 02/26/2008, -1/+3So you downloaded the software and were automatically seeding?
Either this guy has no idea what he is talking about or maybe I'm missing something.
Encryption does not help the slowness, at least not for me, it just helps with the not getting disconnected. - ivandir, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2The hearing is held to make sure the problems are heard and more importantly to find a solution that benefits both Comcast and the Consumers.
I.E. Comcast is of course not going to be penalized. We can't have bad press now can we? - Jade10145, on 02/26/2008, -1/+3“if we can’t control network management, we’ll have to shut down the internet”
the whole internet, seriously? what a broad and misdirected comment.
Yes I believe some universal protocols and methods are needed in order for the internet to work, but blocking bit torrent traffic is not one of those things. To me it sounds like this comment is just a scare tactic designed to be used on people who know nothing about how the internet works (i.e. the judge). I am surprised that someone who I would consider intelligent made such an asinine comment. Ignorant people hear the internet will shut down, and then freak out without getting the facts. - CiscoTM, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2But i will have internet when it rain, snows, wind blows, bright sunny day, and my 21,257 kbps connection blows away DSL. Take a look
http://www.speedtest.net/result/239147676.png and with uTorrent i just encrypt, change port, and i get fast seeding and incredible download speeds. - emmeron, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2I don't know how it is where you live, but a) not everyone has dsl availability, b) dsl blows compared to cable for speed now, and c) you are stuck with the cable co you're zoned for. That's what makes this a problem: you can either deal with a company that has regional monopolies, or go to dsl (if available) or dial-up. Yeah, dial-up is sometimes the only other option. Thanks big bro, way to keep the market free. The only options are a) killing the monopolistic empire on cable, or b) regulating more. I vote for a, but either way... stfu about "get a better provider." What is this, a free market? Noooooooo.
- isntreal, on 02/26/2008, -1/+3I've had the same experience with comcast. If anything is seeding I will immediately drop to 1kb/s for the torrent, and every other connection I make (browsing, ftp, etc.) As soon as I turn bit torrent off, right back to normal. Funny thing is I moved to another town for college, still have comcast... but I live in a ghetto place where they probably assume no one is computer literate enough to use bit torrent and I have no problem.
- LiquidShield, on 02/26/2008, -1/+3And you Zongamin should cram it in your face hole... File sharing has been around for hundreds of years, and it's only become such a big deal recently because people are losing money that's it plain and simple... Have you ever let a friend or family member barrow a casset tape, or CD and let them rip it to their computer... Have you ever just gave anything Books, CD's, Movies, Casset Tapes, etc... to ANYONE becaue you didn't want them any more??? If you have did they pay the company that made any of that their share of the money that they owe because they obtained it from you??? From that point that you are trying to get out there is that sharing is illegal, and by illegal people lose revenue by people not buy their own copy... So in essence if you have EVER done any of that and vise verse then you have illegal obtained a copy of work that should have been purchased... I know that you will refute this by saying physically giving something to someone isnt the same as electronically doing it... Well I kinda think there isn't a difference, either way the chain of money getting is broken once you share something with someone physically or electronically...
- gettarat, on 10/23/2008, -0/+1Comcast seems to be even more evil then Scientology. Onward anonymous, show them who the true internet hackers are.
http://quitsmokingclub.org - LiquidShield, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Yes I know sarox is for financial report purposes due to the whole Enron crap... Here is where I make my point as to WHY IF Comcast was doing this so called "Hacking" even if it was internal...
http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/322
Any security holes which this case internal hacking of network system could possibly lead to someone getting into financial data that they shouldn't get into which would compromise the integrity of said financial data which would fall under sarox if someone found out about.... That person decided to sue them for possibly seeing their financial statements.. - schafer68, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1You seem to misunderstand what the implications are for the protocol when an ISP decides that it will eliminate seeding on its turf. seeding is the lifeblood of the bittorrent system; without seeders, the whole network of distribution will struggle and ultimately fail if enough ISPs prevent such traffic.
Yes, encryption is a workaround to this sort of issue, but it also ignores a crucial point: bittorrent traffic is not inherently illegal and to treat it as such is something that we, as consumers, should not tolerate. Obviously, if you want to use bittorrent for the acquisition of copyrighted materials, you'd be a fool to not encrypt your traffic, again though, not the point we're trying to make. - LiquidShield, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Read the reply to Magamiako... Yes IF THEY WERE HACKING even from and internal stand point that would create a security threat and fall under sarox...
- UomodiRispetto, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Just stop giving Comcast money.. DSL isn't better but at least you don't have to share your bandwidth with your neighborhood.
- barnett25, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Ok, so they can't look at the packet to see what address the packet is supposed to go to either?
Not saying I disagree with you, but that is likely to be their argument. - Dimbleby, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1The FCC Acknowledges Receipt of Comments From …
(my name).....…and Thank You for Your Comments - leerayIG88, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1looks like I better start using wireless! :0
- fenris6644, on 02/26/2008, -1/+2This has nothing to do with Sarbanes Oxley. Nothing at all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarbanes-Oxley_Act - Jenadae, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Learn2Configure
- eschito, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1If your using a Linksys router then thats your problem. Check out UTorrent's FAQ to resolve it.
- subliminalurge, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1No, old what's-his-name was wrong. It turns out, much to everyone's surprise, that it really IS a bunch of trucks.
- eschito, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1http://utorrent.com/faq.php#Special_note_for_users ...
- kenelbow, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Then you aren't a hacker. You're and "Information Security Professional".
-
Show 51 - 97 of 97 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 