What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
109 Comments
- AndrewDB, on 01/15/2008, -1/+62Dear FCC:
Please make Comcast squeal like two pigs during their honeymoon with your judgment.
Love,
Everyone else on the internet. - mbthompson, on 01/15/2008, -2/+60About time Comcrap faced the music.
- InfamousAtheist, on 01/15/2008, -2/+49I'm a (reluctant) Comcast customer and want in on any class action suit!
- seraphisset, on 01/15/2008, -1/+42Oh FCC... Please don't screw this up.
- CursorTN, on 01/15/2008, -0/+27I wish I could share your optimism. I would be very surprised if the current appointees inside the FCC would side with the consumer on this issue. My guess is that the bastards at the FCC will end up ruling to authorize Comcast's slimy network throttling practices, and then it would become widespread with all major ISP's. This is one to watch.
- NSMike, on 01/15/2008, -1/+27Well, the current head of the FCC is in the pocket of the telecoms, but he HATES cable companies. So, let's hope he lays the smackdown on Comcast for this crap, and hopefully does so hard enough that he sets a precedent he can't go against when a telco does the same thing to their internet service.
- moocow1452, on 01/15/2008, -5/+30Yay!
- Onni, on 01/15/2008, -0/+22One of the problems here is that Comcast is actually forging packets. This is not a simple case of Comcast doing "as they please with their own network."
Comcast actually pretends to be the host user at the other end of the connection, and it is under this guise that they send an RST packet which effectively ends the connection. This makes it impossible to seed torrents, and apparently even affects applications that have nothing to do with file sharing such as Lotus Notes. - anemene, on 01/15/2008, -3/+22About damn time. Now, if we could just figure out some way to get the RIAA investigated ...
- RoboDonut, on 01/15/2008, -1/+16Perhaps they shouldn't advertise "Unlimited bandwidth"
I'm not a pirate, but I still think that it's unfair to kill a whole protocol over the unlawful actions of a few users.
I hope they get a nice big fine. - InfamousAtheist, on 01/15/2008, -2/+16Net Neutrality would make a tiered internet (in the US) illegal. Comcast, AT&T, and other ubiquitous network providers would not be allowed to give preference or priority to packets addressed to certain sites or protocols over others, which is what they want.
Net Neutrality protects every consumer's interests. If the big broadband providers are allowed to go through with their plans of tiered service, their interests will be more valuable than yours, mine, and everyone else's. - Dragular, on 01/15/2008, -0/+13The tiered BANDWIDTH is different from the tiered internet. The tiered internet would be something along the lines of "you can use google, MSN, and altavista with this pack, google, msn, yahoo and altavista with this, Digg and Reddit if you add the social news pack, MySpace and Facebook if you opt for Social Networking pack" Tiered bandwidth (29.99 for this speed, 39.99 for this, 49.99 for fastest) would stay the same, unless I'm talking out of my ass.
- Dragular, on 01/15/2008, -0/+12Well.. it starts with an earth-quake, birds and snakes and aeroplanes. Also, lenny bruce is not afraid.
However, I feel fine. - Blankford, on 01/15/2008, -1/+12....counting down the days till FIOS is available in my community....
good lord i hate you comcast.... - bbtweb, on 01/15/2008, -2/+13I hope they get smacked all around the courts.
Time to take Net Neutrality seriously. - UnstableMind, on 01/15/2008, -0/+9You're a tool if you think that is good for satellite radio and its consumers.
- plaincorgi, on 01/15/2008, -0/+9Give it time
- UnstableMind, on 01/15/2008, -5/+14While I think that they have the right to do as they please with their own network, it should have been disclosed up-front. This is definitely a case of false advertising and theft by deception, IMO.
I do have an honest question though, someone please explain the difference of how things are done currently (Tiered bandwidth packages) and what will change with Net Neutrality? - Mr.Gone, on 01/15/2008, -0/+8So what's gonna happen when the FCC rules that Comcast is operating well within the "network managment" guidelines?
- RoboDonut, on 01/15/2008, -1/+9You don't get it, do you?
Killing Bittorrent doesn't stop piracy.
It doesn't even dent piracy.
All it does is cause more problems than it solves. - Barbarino, on 01/15/2008, -3/+11I hate them so much... Every time i have a problem they send a tech into my house, I'm like ass hole the whole neighborhood is out, why are in my house? The guy then says, it's not in your house, we'll have to call the other techs who only work on the outside of houses! amazing! DIE DIE DIE!
- adml_shake, on 01/15/2008, -1/+9I think you "yay" people are jumping the gun on that statement. Comcast is just going to keep throwing money at this until they get the outcome that they want.
- johnnyjai, on 01/15/2008, -1/+9I'm afraid of the repercussions of the FCC actually siding with Comcast, or simply not fining them. This would open a floodgate for all other ISPs to throttle traffic as they see fit.
- MacEnvy, on 01/15/2008, -0/+8True. As much as I'd like to get additional NPR content on my XM (as one would think would happen after a Sirius merger), I'd much rather see competition in the field to spur innovation and keep monthly prices down.
- CursorTN, on 01/15/2008, -1/+8fkr3, so by that logic we should shut down I-40 because some people use it to carry narcotics across the country. I don't argue with the aim, I argue with the method. It's just too broad.
- Harbinger67, on 01/15/2008, -0/+7I hope they paid for that music, or else they'll have another lawsuit right behind this one.
- AndrewDB, on 01/15/2008, -0/+7What the debate is, is the fact that they didn't mention this to any of their customers, or anything. It's completely wrong, and unethical.
- polyGone, on 01/15/2008, -1/+7Deceptive == slimy, IMHO. Seems like you're just arguing semantics.
- ivandir, on 01/15/2008, -0/+6Don't worry the only people that will be screwed are the US customers. FCC is pro-monopoly.
- astrotrain, on 01/15/2008, -0/+6Oh Snap!
- jgzman, on 01/15/2008, -0/+6Anything that is both vital and monopolized cannot be subject to 'free market.' The assumptions of free market include CHOICE. I cannot choose another provider, because Comcast is all I've got. I cannot choose to go without internet, because of my schooling.
Additionaly, I am paying to use their network. All their advertisements say 'unlimited use.'
ADDITIONALLY, the method of shutting down P2P communication can be considered a violation of law, whether they own the networks or not. - josefresco, on 01/15/2008, -0/+5On your next month's bill: Federal Restitution Fine Collection Fee: $3.92
- AndrewDB, on 01/15/2008, -0/+5Actually, I was thinking, whats the difference between Comcast and a Porcupine?..
With Comcast, the pricks are on the inside. - thinman1189, on 01/15/2008, -0/+4For the first time in my life I don't despise the FCC.
- nolt, on 01/15/2008, -0/+4why do i still feel like the torrent community will work around this before the wing-tips make comcast stop?
- Nougat, on 01/15/2008, -0/+4I think what he was referring to with "tiered" was total bandwidth. Like you pay more for more total bandwidth. UnstableMind, Net Neutrality has to do with how that bandwidth is prioritized by the ISPs, whether Content A has priority over Content B - not about what the size of the total pipe is.
- inactive, on 01/15/2008, -1/+4oh the bribes will be flowing this week; all this does is jack the prices up
- surfing, on 01/15/2008, -0/+3class action suits suck. All the customer will get is a free month of service.
- Firehed, on 01/15/2008, -0/+3Well chances are that it would work the other way around ("Hey Microsoft.... if you want to make sure that your site comes through nice and quick, it's only going to cost you $20M a year"), but yeah, that's the general idea. I don't think that charging end-users would work out as they'd quickly defect to somewhere else, unless every ISP in the country collaborated illegally to make sure they all implement the exact same extortionate pricing everywhere overnight.
Tiered bandwidth pricing is absolutely fair and logical, and is unrelated to network neutrality. Of course, their whole reliability clauses kind of throw that out the window, but it's the same idea behind charging more for a T3 than for a T1 (because hey! a T3 is about forty times faster) - Dragular, on 01/15/2008, -1/+4Hasn't the FCC seemed to be on the "Say NO to Net Neutrality" bandwagon thus far though?
- SOS84, on 01/15/2008, -1/+4This issue is all about Comcast et al wanting to pad the bottom line without investing in new infrastructure, it is as simple as that.
- RoboDonut, on 01/15/2008, -1/+4Why are we talking about OiNK, Demonoid, and The Pirate Bay?
This isn't about the trackers. It's about the protocol. It's about Comcast failing to deliver on the services they promise. It's about them arbitrarily tampering with traffic. - Dragular, on 01/15/2008, -0/+3He's certainly not going to torrent it on Comcast.
- x00x, on 01/15/2008, -0/+3Fantastic! Not only does it put Comcast on notice that despite its size and influence it can't mess with its customers with impunity it also sends a message to anti-neutrality *ss-holes like ATT :Don't F*CK with the internet.
- RoboDonut, on 01/15/2008, -1/+4"Comcast knows the connections they're interfering with aren't being used to download an endless stream of linux distros and WoW updates, so does everyone here."
That isn't true. There are plenty of legitimate uses for the Bittorrent protocol.
Plenty of LInux distributions offer Bittorrent downloads to reduce load on their servers. Bandwidth costs for thousands of gigabytes of software are an issue for small nonprofit organizations. They shouldn't need to send the same content over and over again.
There's also a lot of Creative Commons licensed media (such as the stuff on Revision3) which can be scheduled for download in Miro or other aggregators using the Bittorrent protocol.
They shouldn't be damaging the protocol for everyone just because they can't differentiate between copyrighted and legal media.
The issue of Bittorrent slowing down network traffic isn't relevant either. If they kill Bittorrent, the pirates will just run elsewhere. The same amount of data will be flowing regardless of protocol.
I am replying to my own comment because Digg's comment system is a buggy piece of ***** that keeps telling me "Your session has expired, please refresh the page before commenting." - Whackly, on 01/15/2008, -0/+3Why are we wishing porcine ecstasy on comcast again?
- Matteos, on 01/15/2008, -0/+3No, he is going to put on his REM CD and dance in the living room in his underoos.
- dshPls, on 01/15/2008, -0/+2Basically they want to treat the internet like HBO, showtime and basic channels. You need to pay more to see more, ***** that.
- defektiv, on 01/15/2008, -1/+3first a judge rules kucinich be included in the debates and now this? whats going on?
- radink360, on 01/15/2008, -1/+3Get 'em! Time to make them pay for their crimes against humanity! (ie ***** with my net connection).
-
Show 51 - 100 of 109 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is