Quote:
Originally Posted by llama64
I agree with you that pirating is morally bankrupt activity (just go buy the damn CD you cheap skate). But de-prioritizing bit-torrent traffic, or otherwise differentiating between data traffic in general is a bad idea going forward.
|
Why is it a bad idea (I get it from a free speech angle - but I dont think faster BT speeds constitute free speech)? Bit torrent users are famous for their hogging of system resources compared to the person who pays the same $40/month and uses their internet to check cooking recipies. Why should that cooking recipie take an extra 5 seconds to download just so person X in his parents basement can download every episode of Sienfeld faster.
I know people on here would be in an uproar if Shaw actually inforced their downloading limits - maybe that is what it takes. Have a hard cap at 40Gb per month. and 5$/Gb over the limit. When I have used BT my monthy downloads can get over the 140Gb range. In a month I dont use BT, my traffic is under 20Gb. I would guess that 60% of account holders with Shaw or Telus dont use 10Gb per month so 40 seems very generous for most users which is what Comcast should be concerned with.