*ALL* ntl Cap Discussion Here Please. - Page 72

Neil · 09-03-2005, 19:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirtydog

Is the answer to my question contained therein? Or you could just tell me..

I could......but then I'd have to kill you for being lazy!

dirtydog · 09-03-2005, 19:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

I could......but then I'd have to kill you for being lazy!

Do us a favour and tell me, or maybe someone else will as you want to play games it seems

From what I've seen they describe a 'download limit', but I find it hard to believe they would be happy for me to max out my upload 24/7 which would equate to around 1.7GB a day if my maths is right.

**Paul** · 09-03-2005, 20:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirtydog

you presumably think the caps are fine and think 2GB a day is excessive do you?

2GB ?

That's a constant 24 KiloBytes of data a second (every second, 24 hours a day). I'd say that's excessive.

BIGZIPZ · 09-03-2005, 20:11

What is the limit on each UBR in terms of number of connections? If everyone on that UBR downloaded 24KB/sec would it be able to cope?

ian@huth · 09-03-2005, 23:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirtydog

When I say I use 2GB/day, I am including uploads in that. I presume the 30GB does mean upload and download combined? If it just means download, it would be easier to stay within the limit.

So you have 1Gb per day upload?

What are you doing that's legal?

astra_lestat · 10-03-2005, 00:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by ian@huth

So you have 1Gb per day upload?

What are you doing that's legal?

You know, you are making a sport of yourself, each time you utter the word "legal" on this forum.
Who are you to ask this kind of question every person who doesn't like caps?
Are you an undercover agent of RIAA, MPAA? Are you a prosecutor? What do you know about various habbits of people who surf the Internet?

scrotnig · 10-03-2005, 01:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by astra_lestat

You know, you are making a sport of yourself, each time you utter the word "legal" on this forum.
Who are you to ask this kind of question every person who doesn't like caps?
Are you an undercover agent of RIAA, MPAA? Are you a prosecutor? What do you know about various habbits of people who surf the Internet?

The point is that many people struggle to understand what 'legal' reason people need for massive usage allowances. As Neil has said, there are only so many 'Linux distros' people can claim to need without it sounding silly.

And, once it is established that much of this excessive usage is illegal, there comes the question of why an ISP should invest considerable cash in providing a service for people to do things which are illegal. And the answer is, they shouldn't. Bandwidth is not an infinite resource.

Cue several people telling me how they need to download 30 Linux distros a week for 'testing purposes'.

ian@huth · 10-03-2005, 01:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by astra_lestat

You know, you are making a sport of yourself, each time you utter the word "legal" on this forum.
Who are you to ask this kind of question every person who doesn't like caps?
Are you an undercover agent of RIAA, MPAA? Are you a prosecutor? What do you know about various habbits of people who surf the Internet?

Who am I? What do I do? What do I know? Wouldn't you like to know?

The only people who make comments like that are usually doing something illegal!

astra_lestat · 10-03-2005, 01:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by scrotnig

The point is that many people struggle to understand what 'legal' reason people need for massive usage allowances. As Neil has said, there are only so many 'Linux distros' people can claim to need without it sounding silly.

And, once it is established that much of this excessive usage is illegal, there comes the question of why an ISP should invest considerable cash in providing a service for people to do things which are illegal. And the answer is, they shouldn't. Bandwidth is not an infinite resource.

Cue several people telling me how they need to download 30 Linux distros a week for 'testing purposes'.

What you are sayingm just shows that you are ignorant of what the Internet is.
I will give you just 2 examples:
1. http://www.researchchannel.org/webcast/ 1300kbps
2. http://www.m1live.com/ 128kbps
Only 2 examples out of hundreds.
You ppl must think before posting your half-masked accusations.

ian@huth · 10-03-2005, 01:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by astra_lestat

What you are sayingm just shows that you are ignorant of what the Internet is.
I will give you just 2 examples:
1. http://www.researchchannel.org/webcast/ 1300kbps
2. http://www.m1live.com/ 128kbps
Only 2 examples out of hundreds.
You ppl must think before posting your half-masked accusations.

Firstly, who accused you of doing anything illegal?

Secondly, I was asking about uploads, not downloads.

Thirdly, customers that don't do anything illegal with their connections are subsidising those that do.

Finally, caps are only needed because of what the heavy illegal users are using in bandwidth

astra_lestat · 10-03-2005, 01:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by ian@huth

Firstly, who accused you of doing anything illegal?

Secondly, I was asking about uploads, not downloads.

Thirdly, customers that don't do anything illegal with their connections are subsidising those that do.

Finally, caps are only needed because of what the heavy illegal users are using in bandwidth

My replay with the links was to Scrotnig.

You accused me when I posted my opinion about caps in the forum that was created for that specific reason along with a poll. I cannot find this post anymore. Strangely enough the post is gone. Probably was deleted by wise Admin.

If you worry about subsiding other ppl needs, you better tell the government to review their point of view on asylum seekers policy.

I am off, from this discussion. I wish you all well.

scrotnig · 10-03-2005, 01:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by astra_lestat

What you are sayingm just shows that you are ignorant of what the Internet is.
I will give you just 2 examples:
1. http://www.researchchannel.org/webcast/ 1300kbps
2. http://www.m1live.com/ 128kbps
Only 2 examples out of hundreds.
You ppl must think before posting your half-masked accusations.

Until Neil exposed it for what it is, the vast majority of people on this forum claimed they needed to download more than 30gb a month because they needed lots of Linux distros. The fact is that that reason is crap, and they were using p2p software. Neil helpfully blew that one out of the water.

I'm afraid it's a fact that the vast majority of people for whom 30gb caps are an issue are using the service for illegal purposes. Some in a private capacity, but others to burn CDs and make money. I accept there a small number of people with legitimate reasons to exceed 30gb but these really are few and far between when set against the customer base as a whole.

I occasionally get music through WinMx. Not nearly enough to go near a cap, but possibly six or seven items a month. However, I'm fully aware that this is deemed 'illegal activity' and I wouldn't expect my ISP, whoever they were, to support my doing that in any way. Nor would I claim on here that I was really downloading Linux distros.

If p2p suddenly got blocked somehow, I'd be disappointed, but I'd accept it, because I'm not making a living out of it.

dirtydog · 10-03-2005, 04:12

Can I ask again as I'm sure someone knows (and is willing to give) the answer to this.

Does the 30GB limit include uploads, or not?
__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by scrotnig

Until Neil exposed it for what it is, the vast majority of people on this forum claimed they needed to download more than 30gb a month because they needed lots of Linux distros. The fact is that that reason is crap, and they were using p2p software. Neil helpfully blew that one out of the water.

There are plenty of legal ways to use 2GB a day bandwidth - what my uses are is none of your business, but your and others' posts here show your ignorance about the internet.

daxx · 10-03-2005, 04:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by pop80_uk

Right I know about these bandwidths and that they apply on the new speed upgrades, this concerns me for five main reasons:

1) These bandwidths will be eaten away at by pop ups and ad's
2) These bandwidths will be eaten away by Bulk mails
3) These bandwidths will be eaten away by spam mails
4) These bandwidths will be eaten away at by extended forwards and foward attachments
5) These bandwidths will be eaten away at by online surveys

These are effectively out of the average users control and will effect their bandwidth usage. So say the odd user on the 300K service (much like me

) Uses the net for 6 hours a day, uses e-bay to buy and sell and sends alot of e-mails.
Then general shopping and surfing, based on this I have estimated I will be 500mb over the monthly band width.

Am I correct in my guesstimates and are the problems as I evisage?

Thanks people.

1. Get a pop-up blocker and ad stopper
2. Use a mailwasher type app to check your mail BEFORE you download it
3. Use anti-spam filters to check your mail BEFORE you download it
4. Don't forward any mail, let the originator decide who to send it to.
5. Stay away from sites that do surveys

simple steps to reduce your bandwith hogging list above

Neil · 10-03-2005, 08:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirtydog

Can I ask again as I'm sure someone knows (and is willing to give) the answer to this.

Does the 30GB limit include uploads, or not?

http://www.home.ntl.com/icat/broadband

It actually lists it as a "usage allowance", rather than specifying up/download limits.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirtydog

There are plenty of legal ways to use 2GB a day bandwidth

But no there aren't. People who "need" to download 2GB per day are either doing something illegal, or need a business connection (or both).

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirtydog

what my uses are is none of your business

That's true, but if your "use" of your internet connection is affecting others in your area, then it is ntl's business.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirtydog

but your and others' posts here show your ignorance about the internet.

Your posts here clearly show your ignorance regarding me/us/this site, I suggest you do a little more research before you make sweeping statements like that.

I am totally against the ntl cap (& I don't even have ntl BB) because of the way they introduced it.

They sneaked it into their AUP late on a Friday afternoon, hoping no one would notice (except we leaked it), & then applied to all customers-new & existing & that is why I (& others have an issue with it).

IMO, if you are going to change a service like that, then the change should only apply to new customers, & should also be well communicated & documented to them too (something that ntl are completely incable of), that way those customers can make an informed decision as to whether they want to sign up to an ISP with a cap. Existing customers should have been left "uncapped" IMO as that's what they signed up to.

It kinda reminds me of the old 'Mercury' mobile phone tariffs when they launched many moons ago. Youhad to buy the phone, but the tariff it came with was free evening & weekend calls (to landlines & mobiles I think)

There are plenty of people out there who still have this tariff & it costs T-Mobile (as they are now) a fortune, & those people regularly get contacted by T-Mobile offering them big wads of cash to sign a new contract on a different tariff (not surprisingly, no one takes them up on their "offer"!) & that's what I feel should have happened with ntl & their sneaky cap.

t wasn't so much the cap itself that was the issue, more so the way in which they chose to force it on new & existing customers in a sneaky, underhand way.

So, please don't make sweeping comments about me or my site members (lack of) knowledge of the internet, when most have been using it far longer than maybe you yourself have.