I for one would welcome any capping provided that it is to the benefit of a good number of users... <ducks>
Not everyone has 'broadband' connectivity so that they can abuse the software / music industry by P2P sharing. Many people have broadband for legitimate usage. Sure, I download legitimate files from places on the interweb but I
don't leave my machine downloading oodles of $music / $software / $porn from the likes of P2P Kazaa or $other P2P facilities.
Think about other users who simply want faster access to the web, speedy download of pop3 mail along with the ability to use telnet and other Internet tools without their connection slowing due to contention ratios and the fact that broadband accessibility is being 'misused' by other users.
The mis-conception that "Well, I've paid $ for #mbs and so I shall use it" derives mostly from the bad ole days of dialup. 56kbs was the most that users could get on dialup and so broadband packages were badly marketed on the basis of greater speed through capacity - which subsequently encouraged users to simply download
more mbs/$.
I personally object to the fact that my downstream is reliant on fscktards sharing the same feed and that when said fscktards decide to download half of HMV my speed is greatly reduced.
It's about time people were educated to understand that greater bandwidth relates to greater capacity, rather than ability to download *mbs of, often illegal, rubbish, just because they can.
Sure, there's legitimate uses too, but lets face it, if users don't wise up, we'll all end up with a bum deal.
Oh, and don't expect ISPs to increase their backbone on this basis. Think... bandwidth capacity is only as great as the weakest point in the connection - this mostly being at the local exchange points, hence contention ratios - upgrading their already under utilised backbone will not make a $hit of difference.
JESUS
