Comcast_Is_Starting_The_Tiered_Internet_Whether_We_Like_It_or_Not

Stephen Shaw sshaw at decriptor.com
Tue Aug 21 10:42:12 MDT 2007


On 8/21/07, Clint Savage <herlo1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 8/21/07, Corey Edwards <tensai at zmonkey.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-08-21 at 10:02 -0600, Clint Savage wrote:
> > > I see where this is going, we're going to debate whether changing
> > > their TOS is appropriate.  I don't think that's the issue here though.
> > >  The real issue is:
> > >
> > > If Comcast can block one particular protocol from being sent across
> > > their wires, what's to stop them (or another major/minor ISP) from
> > > doing it to other protocols/traffic.  Since when is it illegal to use
> > > bittorrent?  Since when does an ISP have the right to say what types
> > > of traffic I can send?  Since when should I bow down to them and take
> > > it?
> >
> > What about an ISP blocking the latest virus/worm? Would you rather they
> > didn't block that traffic? Wouldn't an ISP be considered derelict of
> > duty if they failed to block it?
>
> If the customer wants it, you should do it.  Did I request they
> block/limit my bittorrent traffic?  Did other customers?  I doubt it.
> >
> > If you had a choice to make between 1 customer's service being degraded
> > (due to a p2p limit or similar) or 20 customers' service being disrupted
> > due to packet floods, which would you choose?
> >
> The limits they make are artificial.  YES, they are.  So really its
> them choosing to limit the 200 customers using bittorrent in favor of
> not improving their services.
>
> >
> > > I understand they have limitations, but those limitations are
> > > artificial.  They limit consumer bandwidth only to let business
> > > bandwidth in at a higher price.  I honestly think that businesses and
> > > consumers should pay the same price.
> >
> > If you're not getting anything more for a business package over a
> > residential package, then yeah that's a rip off. But my customers do get
> > more for their business class service.
> >
> What do business customers get?  I mean I get the concept of service
> levels, but if it comes down to bandwidth and access, then no, they
> shouldn't be charged more.  If they get more services then I guess I
> can see that being viable.
>
> /*
> PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
> Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
> Don't fear the penguin.
> */
>


I think this is all backwards.  A business doesn't have to do what the
customers wants...  HOWEVER, it certainly helps their business to grow and
expand and keep loyal customers.  How many people believe that microsoft
should open source or do whatever and they don't.  Or feel they are unfair?

Just because you think its unfair doesn't mean that they should change.

Even if they are the only service they don't have to change.  It's there
choice, whether it grows or shrinks their company.  Good/Bad business
decisions...

I would agree that if you don't like what they are doing, cancel your
service and make it known why.  Boycott them if you will.

I just don't see why they would be obligated to provide a certain amount of
features/service just because they are the only ones.  Isn't they why we try
to get rid of monopolies?



More information about the PLUG mailing list