4 ms·

The argument that torrent users degrade the network for other users is tenuous at best, and I wish someone would start calling people out on it. If the ISP say

The argument that torrent users degrade the network for other users is tenuous at best, and I wish someone would start calling people out on it. If the ISP says I have a 6m/768k broadband line, then I should be able to saturate that limit to my heart's content, with whatever I want to download/upload. If it degrades the local network somehow, that is the ISP's fault, not mine, and my neighbors are free to be angry at the ISP for an unreliable connection. What is the point of having a connection that you can't use to its potential? If torrent users really are degrading the network, then lower the speed caps for the given price tier, as you have obviously oversold capacity. Or, better yet, upgrade the network. Laying a guilt trip on people for 'using too much of something they paid for' is just retarded.

wmf 18y ago
The argument that torrent users should be able to use all the bandwidth they've paid for is totally disconnected from ISP economics, and I wish someone would start calling people out on it. Wait, that's what I'm doing right now. ISPs are built on statistical multiplexing. They pay something like $40/Mbps/month and resell that bandwidth for around one tenth that price. If ISPs had enough capacity to satisfy all their customers simultaneously, they have to increase prices or decrease speeds enormously. If 6M service suddenly cost $200/month, then any kind of multimedia on the Net dies immediately. Statistical multiplexing benefits almost all Internet users (whose traffic is bursty), so it's not going away.
- Xichekolas 18y ago
  Oh I realize how it works. It's the same reason my university parking department could oversell parking spaces. Not everyone is going to be on campus at once. Thankfully not every user is using BitTorrent. But some are. If the statistical model assumes that no one will ever use all they are alloted, then the model is broken and needs to be re-calibrated. If this results in a price increase, at least that is transparent, rather than traffic shaping and individual throttling, which denies people something they paid for, and basically amounts to false advertising: > "Speeds up to 150x faster than dialup![1]" [1] But you can't actually take advantage of that rate, because it'd be rude to your neighbors.

wmf 18y ago

The argument that torrent users should be able to use all the bandwidth they've paid for is totally disconnected from ISP economics, and I wish someone would start calling people out on it. Wait, that's what I'm doing right now. ISPs are built on statistical multiplexing. They pay something like $40/Mbps/month and resell that bandwidth for around one tenth that price. If ISPs had enough capacity to satisfy all their customers simultaneously, they have to increase prices or decrease speeds enormously. If 6M service suddenly cost $200/month, then any kind of multimedia on the Net dies immediately. Statistical multiplexing benefits almost all Internet users (whose traffic is bursty), so it's not going away.

Xichekolas 18y ago
Oh I realize how it works. It's the same reason my university parking department could oversell parking spaces. Not everyone is going to be on campus at once. Thankfully not every user is using BitTorrent. But some are. If the statistical model assumes that no one will ever use all they are alloted, then the model is broken and needs to be re-calibrated. If this results in a price increase, at least that is transparent, rather than traffic shaping and individual throttling, which denies people something they paid for, and basically amounts to false advertising: > "Speeds up to 150x faster than dialup![1]" [1] But you can't actually take advantage of that rate, because it'd be rude to your neighbors.