5 ms·

What are you doing that you're using more than 1.2TB/mo, and at only 80MB/sec no less? I set Netflix to a lower resolution to save on bandwidth. As a secondary

What are you doing that you're using more than 1.2TB/mo, and at only 80MB/sec no less? I set Netflix to a lower resolution to save on bandwidth. As a secondary effect I don't think I ever go over 250GB per month, even downloading games, datasets, etc.

xnx 3y ago
I use a lot of bandwidth backing up photos and videos to the cloud.
dbspin 3y ago
As ordinary subscribers, not crippling Netflix or Youtube resolution, torrenting a moderate amount of movies, downloading games etc, my partner and I regularly go over 1TB a month. I don't think that's particularly unusual. But our internet isn't metered (nor of course should it be, considering large ISPs all have peering arrangements and fixed cost leased lines).
- giantg2 3y ago
  I wouldn't exactly call 720p crippling compared to 1080p (I don't have any hardware above that anyways).
  - rescbr 3y ago
    I downgraded my Netflix subscription to the 720p basic one once they started cracking up on password sharing. Considering the shitty bitrate they use, there’s no reason to pay for 1080p and 2+ screens if my parents & in-laws can’t also use it. Those streaming services should take a lesson or two on video encoding from the scene people.
  - superkuh 3y ago
    Just a note, I'm op, and I mostly only download stuff at 720p. But I never stream entertainment unless it's live. Video/audio media is only a healthy fraction of my data transfer though. Most is participating in p2p networks like tor and i2p, hosting my website from home, torrenting, downloading large language models, and other random stuff.
    - giantg2 3y ago
      Ah,that makes sense. I forgot about Tor. I used to run a node years ago. I don't remember how much traffic it would get. Probably not as much as the NSA/CIA nodes did lol.
Dylan16807 3y ago
Well maybe they don't want a lower resolution. One person leaving a twitch stream on during working hours would use up more than half that budget. > and at only 80MB/sec 1.2TB is only 5% utilization of the connection on average.
- giantg2 3y ago
  "Well maybe they don't want a lower resolution." That's fine. It's also possible they don't want to pay the overage charges even more. It's up to them.
  - Dylan16807 3y ago
    It's more that you shouldn't need to ask "what you doing...no less" Video quality is a choice but it's a pretty obvious thing for people to want, and video easily eats a terabyte. Also your sibling comment says none of your hardware is over 720p? If you have normal-ish eyesight then I feel bad for you, even just considering text clarity.
    - giantg2 3y ago
      "It's more that you shouldn't need to ask "what you doing" Are you really trying to tell someone on HN not to be curious? I am genuinely wondering what cool thing they might be doing with that. "and video easily eats a terabyte." It doesn't for me. We stream quite at bit at 720p, gaming, etc. we don't get even close to that. I mean none of my hardware goes over 1080p, and that my difference between 720p and 1080p is not big. My eyes are slightly better that the standard 20/20. I'm not aure why you say you would feel bad for me as your entire comment is meant to antagonize me.
      - Dylan16807 3y ago
        > Are you really trying to tell someone on HN not to be curious? I am genuinely wondering what cool thing they might be doing with that. No, I'm not saying not to be curious. I'm saying your wording implied it was excessive for ordinary use, while it's very easy to reach. > I mean none of my hardware goes over 1080p, and that my difference between 720p and 1080p is not big. My eyes are slightly better that the standard 20/20. Okay then. > I'm not aure why you say you would feel bad for me as your entire comment is meant to antagonize me. I would feel bad for you if you were stuck with a 720p screen, and think you very much were missing something. How is that antagonizing? You're reading into things much more than I did. Now that you clarify it's 1080, I'm not sure why you brought that up.
superkuh 3y ago
>and at only 80MB/sec no less? Lol, I wish I had 80MB/s. No, cable ratings are given in megabits. I get 10MB/s max. But that's not the only relevant number. I'm always uploading. And re: download, those 25GB large language models I've been testing this last year have been eating a lot. But really I'm just constantly using a small amounts because I participate in the internet rather than use centralized services (and even host my dot com from home). 1.2 TB both up/down + comcast internal overhead goes fast. That only about 400KB/s average.
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  > And re: download, those 25GB large language models I've been testing this last year have been eating a lot. That's like almost 1/day for over a year?
nebula8804 3y ago
Its 2024. Google Fi is serving some cities with 8Gb/s symmetrical. The internet has been around long enough that OP should be able to saturate the connection for anything he/she wants no questions asked. Its literally pulses of light going through a strand of fiber. It is not even matter just photons! They are paying for photons!

xnx 3y ago

I use a lot of bandwidth backing up photos and videos to the cloud.

dbspin 3y ago

As ordinary subscribers, not crippling Netflix or Youtube resolution, torrenting a moderate amount of movies, downloading games etc, my partner and I regularly go over 1TB a month. I don't think that's particularly unusual. But our internet isn't metered (nor of course should it be, considering large ISPs all have peering arrangements and fixed cost leased lines).

giantg2 3y ago
I wouldn't exactly call 720p crippling compared to 1080p (I don't have any hardware above that anyways).
- rescbr 3y ago
  I downgraded my Netflix subscription to the 720p basic one once they started cracking up on password sharing. Considering the shitty bitrate they use, there’s no reason to pay for 1080p and 2+ screens if my parents & in-laws can’t also use it. Those streaming services should take a lesson or two on video encoding from the scene people.
- superkuh 3y ago
  Just a note, I'm op, and I mostly only download stuff at 720p. But I never stream entertainment unless it's live. Video/audio media is only a healthy fraction of my data transfer though. Most is participating in p2p networks like tor and i2p, hosting my website from home, torrenting, downloading large language models, and other random stuff.
  - giantg2 3y ago
    Ah,that makes sense. I forgot about Tor. I used to run a node years ago. I don't remember how much traffic it would get. Probably not as much as the NSA/CIA nodes did lol.

Dylan16807 3y ago

Well maybe they don't want a lower resolution. One person leaving a twitch stream on during working hours would use up more than half that budget. > and at only 80MB/sec 1.2TB is only 5% utilization of the connection on average.

giantg2 3y ago
"Well maybe they don't want a lower resolution." That's fine. It's also possible they don't want to pay the overage charges even more. It's up to them.
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  It's more that you shouldn't need to ask "what you doing...no less" Video quality is a choice but it's a pretty obvious thing for people to want, and video easily eats a terabyte. Also your sibling comment says none of your hardware is over 720p? If you have normal-ish eyesight then I feel bad for you, even just considering text clarity.
  - giantg2 3y ago
    "It's more that you shouldn't need to ask "what you doing" Are you really trying to tell someone on HN not to be curious? I am genuinely wondering what cool thing they might be doing with that. "and video easily eats a terabyte." It doesn't for me. We stream quite at bit at 720p, gaming, etc. we don't get even close to that. I mean none of my hardware goes over 1080p, and that my difference between 720p and 1080p is not big. My eyes are slightly better that the standard 20/20. I'm not aure why you say you would feel bad for me as your entire comment is meant to antagonize me.
    - Dylan16807 3y ago
      > Are you really trying to tell someone on HN not to be curious? I am genuinely wondering what cool thing they might be doing with that. No, I'm not saying not to be curious. I'm saying your wording implied it was excessive for ordinary use, while it's very easy to reach. > I mean none of my hardware goes over 1080p, and that my difference between 720p and 1080p is not big. My eyes are slightly better that the standard 20/20. Okay then. > I'm not aure why you say you would feel bad for me as your entire comment is meant to antagonize me. I would feel bad for you if you were stuck with a 720p screen, and think you very much were missing something. How is that antagonizing? You're reading into things much more than I did. Now that you clarify it's 1080, I'm not sure why you brought that up.

superkuh 3y ago

>and at only 80MB/sec no less? Lol, I wish I had 80MB/s. No, cable ratings are given in megabits. I get 10MB/s max. But that's not the only relevant number. I'm always uploading. And re: download, those 25GB large language models I've been testing this last year have been eating a lot. But really I'm just constantly using a small amounts because I participate in the internet rather than use centralized services (and even host my dot com from home). 1.2 TB both up/down + comcast internal overhead goes fast. That only about 400KB/s average.

FireBeyond 3y ago
> And re: download, those 25GB large language models I've been testing this last year have been eating a lot. That's like almost 1/day for over a year?

nebula8804 3y ago

Its 2024. Google Fi is serving some cities with 8Gb/s symmetrical. The internet has been around long enough that OP should be able to saturate the connection for anything he/she wants no questions asked. Its literally pulses of light going through a strand of fiber. It is not even matter just photons! They are paying for photons!