no server rule revisited [Was: Re: Thou shalt not question Comcast]

[jkinz-+hffLmS/kj4 at public.gmane.org (jkinz-+hffLmS/kj4 at public.gmane.org)]

On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 08:29:57AM -0600, Jack Coats wrote:
> 
>   How can we live by our rules by making them think we are playing their 
> game their way?
> 
> Defining what they think their game is, I would guess, is
>   1) appear to use a supported OS
>   2) appear to not use 'excessive bandwidth'
>   3) appear to not be providing 'undesirable services'
> 
> Now, how can we 'appear' to be model 'cable' citizens?

Jack, none of that solves the problem. It defers it.  20 Months from
now when gas is back up to $4.00 per gallon, and we all want to
video-conference into work (or wherever) Comcast will have to outlaw
that as well since their equipment cant handle enough bandwidth in the
upload direction (per cable segment) to allow that and still have the
rest of their customers needs met.

(insert any new way to use lots of bandwidth if the video
conferencing doesn't seem realistic to you)

Also I don't really want to cheat or fake the business I am a
customer of. I would rather convince them to use a reasonable
set of terms. 

I think Comcast is already preparing for an onslaught of on line
video usage when the analog broadcasts get dropped in February. 


Note - please try to use the traditional and expected bottom post
format we all use in this list, per rfc-1855.


--