Netflix Turns Focus Back to Disc

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

Instead of bandwidth, you all should be more concerned with the current proposed censorship bill that would ban any website with illegally used streamed copyrighted material. It would be blocked to all U.S. citizens and any that actually do have access, if you stream a copyrighted song or video, you are subject criminal fines and jail time. That would include this website were in the forums there are YouTube videos with clips from movies.

This isn't censorship; it's copyright protection, but it's never going to pass in its current form anyway, so stop being paranoid.

The current system will continue: sites will not be in violation as long as they respond to take-down notices and make best efforts to eliminate copyrighted material.

But having said that, there is absolutely no reason for anyone to be posting copyrighted material (as opposed to a link) that doesn't belong to them. And why people repost the same clips is beyond me. YouTube would be a lot better place if they had a way to eliminate redundant material.

The only thing I agree with is that I should be able to make a video or sound recording of my performing someone else's copyrighted song as long as I'm not making any money (including advertising revenue) from its appearance, subject to the ability of the writer or publisher to issue a take-down notice. I also disagree with Congress' constant extensions of the copyright term, although perhaps I wouldn't feel that way if it were my song (or songs written by my ancestors) that were being exploited by someone else.

Why do you think you have the right to post someone else's assets without compensation? Can I come into your house and steal your TV? Because there's no difference. I'm a photographer with work on the web and my work gets stolen all the time, which really pisses me off. And don't tell me about the "rich record companies". The recording business in the U.S. is half of what it was in 1999 and that doesn't even account for inflation. The record companies are dying (somewhat deserved, I will admit.) If the EMI sale goes through, there will only be three major record companies left in the U.S.

This web concept that "content should be free" has and will continue to destroy many businesses. And then we'll be left with nothing but junk content. People who cite this mantra consider themselves to be highly sophisticated about technology, but I would take the position that one is completely naive about technology if one thinks that stealing virtual media is any different than stealing physical media.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by wormraper

sorry, been to Korea, Japan, Austria, Italy etc.. I've seen bandwidth that just RIPS us to SHREDS, no caps. full duplexes as standard etc. the U.S. has NOT upgraded it's infrastructure for years. they oversell their bandwidth and wonder why them come up short. believe me this has become a BIG problem. they have NOT increased their backbones for a LONG time. they keep adding customers and taking hte profits not cycling them back in for upgrades. it's pure stupidity (and Australia?? that's a point for caps. Australia Caps EVERYTHING, they are one of the worst socialist nations in the world)

Well I don't know about all of that. I think that the ISPs have increased capacity and speed. But they want to make a killing so have jumped on the cap wagon. But some on that wagon have soft caps they never enforce too so its a mixed bag. Canada got wise and said you can't charge by amount of data downloaded, you have to charge by the speed of the connection. I agree. And the price I saw, $25 for a 25mbps connection is dirt cheap.

I remember reading about fiber optic systems out west getting like 25mbps and just amazed at that speed back when I getting 3. Now I get 36, pay for 14 and could get 50mbps if I wanted. I've actually see the meter on mine go to 75, I have Comcast and they burst part of the download. So I think, at least in some areas, speed has greatly increased as DOCSIS 3.0 is being rolled out by ISPs nationwide. The issue is ISPs holding onto caps which are based on older capacity. Comcast's cap is 3 or more years old. That is light years in technological advancement.

36mbps and a 250gb cap is like saying the Ferrari I am leasing can only be driven 100 miles a month. Ridiculous.

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

This isn't censorship; it's copyright protection, but it's never going to pass in its current form anyway, so stop being paranoid... .

Any website that the U.S. Government says has copyright infringement, like YouTube, will be censored by American ISPs. The ENTIRE website.

Paranoid? You don't know much about the history of politics in the U.S. do you? What they do is tack on items to appease those against this measure to insure passage. Happens all the time. This is a Draconian measure by the recording arts industry.

Dude, don't jump on me about copyright use. I'm not 10 years old. Where did I say anything about my support of unauthorized use of copyright material? You seemed to miss the issue. THE ENTIRE WEBSITE WILL BE CENSORED if ANY ILLEGAL COPYRIGHT MATERIAL IS FOUND ON IT. That would include this very website.

http://www.mydesert.com/article/2011...text|Frontpage

But critics say it is so loosely worded it could threaten many U.S. websites, especially popular social media such as Facebook and YouTube. To stay in business, such sites would have to more closely police content posted by millions of users every day.

The proposed legislation is so controversial it has generated alarm on both sides of the political spectrum.

The Library of Congress website reports it as one of the most searched bills of November. In the California delegation, both House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Darrell Issa, the Republican chair of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, oppose it.

I agree with Senator Ron Wyden's counter proposal to let the ITC go after these websites.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

so in 15 years your cost increased 3x to surf the web which was something you could do 15 years ago. The speed is imaterial, the action is the same.

Speed is immaterial? I don't think so. Go back to using a 28.8 modem and see if you don't kill yourself while waiting an hour for a single screen to appear.

I'm old enough to remember the earliest online systems, such as Venture One, which was a joint venture between IBM, Sears and CBS, if I recall correctly. You would watch one letter appear on the screen at a time. Literally.

Even with a 56K modem, I would get up in the morning, do the dialup, take a shower, get dressed and hopefully, by the time I was finished, my email would be loaded. It's easy to forget how far we've come.

Besides, you can't watch video on slow connections.

Furthermore, the issue isn't just speed, it's the amount of data passing through the pipe. And it's already been demonstrated that users of iPhones and iPads (for example) use data at much higher rates than other users.

Having said that, I don't want any limitations on the amount of data I use. And while I feel that the ISPs do deserve to be compensated for the infrastructure improvements they must constantly make, I do feel that what I have to pay for my monthly ISP bill + my cell phone bill is too expensive.

I agree with those who feel that the U.S. is lagging behind. But there are advantages and disadvantages to each type of political system and in our capitalist system, especially at a time when Republicans strongly feel that the Federal Government should be doing next to nothing, such infrastructure improvement must be privately driven and the ISPs and phone companies have a vested interest in keeping costs down.

Therefore, socialist countries will have more developed infrastructure, as they most certainly do with public transportation systems and other public works.

Based on results from Speedtest.net over the last six months, the country with highest average download speed is.....wait for it....................







Lithuania!!!!!!
with an average speed of 31.76Mbps.
Who would have thought?

South Korea, the generally recognized champion, comes in 2nd with 29.84.

Of course, these figures are biased by the fact that they comprise of numbers from people who have elected to test their speeds. Each of these countries might still have tons of dial-up or other slow speed users who never check their speeds.

1. Lithuania 31.76Mbps
2. South Korea 29.84 Mbps
3. Latvia 29.76 Mbps
4. Sweden 26.14 Mbps
5. Romania 25.79 Mbps
6. Netherlands 25.12 Mbps
7. Macau 24.83 Mbps
8. Estonia 23.07 Mbps
9. Bulgaria 22.68 Mbps
10. Iceland 21.19 Mbps
...
25. Japan 14.62 Mbps
...
33. United States 12.22 Mbps
...
174. Mali 0.52 MBps

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by wormraper

I have 12 mbps dsl and i max out my connection every single day. never had a shortage. I run about 500 gigs a month down and THANK GOD no caps.

But just imagine if every single citizen of the U.S was downloading the amount of gigs that you and 'slick' download every month, then you would need caps, cause your network wouldn't be able to handle it. That's the point of caps to stop excessive usage, don't you think 500 gb's a month is excessive usage?

People like you and slick1ru2 should be happy that a lot of other people still prefer to buy physical content because if they didn't and a good percentage of those people turned to downloading their movies tomorrow, then it would most certainly end up having an affect on you and the way you like using the Internet.

IMO unless you are a heavy downloader of content or a business, then you don't need the highest speeds or many GB's a month, as simply browsing the Internet doesn't require much. Even here in Australia with the way our network is ATM, the speeds we currently have are way beyond fast enough for everyday web browsing, webpages load up with a blink of an eye, what more do you want?

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

But just imaging if every single citizen of the U.S was downloading the amount of gigs that you and 'slick' download every month, then you would need caps, cause your network wouldn't be able to handle it. That's the point of caps to stop excessive usage, don't you think 500 gb's a month is excessive usage?

People like you and slick1ru2 should be happy that a lot of people still prefer to buy physical content because if they didn't and a good percentage of people turned to downloading their movies tomorrow, then it most would certainly end up having an affect on you and the way you like using the Internet.

IMO unless you are a heavy downloader of content or a business, then you don't need the highest speeds or many GB's a month, as simply browsing the Internet doesn't require much. Even here in Australia with the way our network is ATM, the speeds we currently have are way beyond fast enough for everyday web browsing, webpages load up with a blink of an eye, what more do you want?

no not at all. go to places like I mentioned before and MANY users can download in the TERABYTE per month. because they actually spend the time and money to upgrade their systems. the U.S. has dropped the ball and is expecting us to pick up their tab for them. every year the web gets bigger and bigger and every year more data is being pushed through those pipes. trying to limit the amount you use is nothing but a cheap bandaid to try and stem the bloodflow out of a hemorrhaging wound.

and excessive? why?? i'm offered unlimited bandwidth. I take advantage of that. the internet is not just to check my email and browse blu-ray.com. it's my tv , my data site, my work, my hobby etc. I can do a hundred gigs just by playing around with uploading and downloading my linux distribution patches and work. 200-300 gigs is just streaming video (legally). I'm sorry the web is getting bigger and more robust yet people are saying we need to not use it as much

you'd be really surprised how much bandwidth many people in the states use too. (and in other countries). once comcast started putting their caps on friends and family started monitoring. out of curiosity (and because I'm the tech guy) they had me do the monitoring. friends who only were home 4 -5 hours a day still used between 120-180 gigs of data a month. my poor mother who's tech illiterate used 100 gigs a month. streaming video and large file sizes are just the norm today. especially since everything is moving towards digital downloads like TV, etc...

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by wormraper

no not at all. go to places like I mentioned before and MANY users can download in the TERABYTE per month. because they actually spend the time and money to upgrade their systems. the U.S. has dropped the ball and is expecting us to pick up their tab for them. every year the web gets bigger and bigger and every year more data is being pushed through those pipes. trying to limit the amount you use is nothing but a cheap bandaid to try and stem the bloodflow out of a hemorrhaging wound.

and excessive? why?? i'm offered unlimited bandwidth. I take advantage of that. the internet is not just to check my email and browse blu-ray.com. it's my tv , my data site, my work, my hobby etc. I can do a hundred gigs just by playing around with uploading and downloading my linux distribution patches and work. 200-300 gigs is just streaming video (legally). I'm sorry the web is getting bigger and more robust yet people are saying we need to not use it as much

Who said not to use the internet as much? I think what's being dicussed is very simple: Those that use it more, will pay more!
Economy 101.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Who said not to use the internet as much? I think what's being dicussed is very simple: Those that use it more, will pay more!
Economy 101.

riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, do they do that with our TV??? no, yet BECAUSE of TV (that's where A LOT of this bandwidth is going) they are trying it now. stupid, ridiculous, ESPECIALLY when you compare to the rest of the world. and we DO pay more. higher speeds = more usage, duuuuuuuuuuuh, so I pay for a higher speed. thus I pay more because my pipeline is now being increased. if I went for full fiber I'd pay even more. because I'd jump from 12mpbs down to 40mpbs down (and I guarantee I'd max that out too)

and netflix is looking at increasing it's rez to 1080p!!! increasing bandwidth and increasing usage for EVERYONE who uses that stuff. that's one of the reasons they charge by the speed and not by the download. sizes CONSTANTLY increase at exponential rates. adjusting the prices per gig would be a constantly moving (and erratic) target. this is not like our electric bill where rates are fairly steady and increase every once in a while. that's in an industry where electric usage in the creation of devices is monitored and tried to get as small as possible. the net is an area where size is constantly getting larger, constantly increasing and more size is inevitable. In the tech and web industry surges of double and triple filesizes in a few months can be pretty standard

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

But just imaging if every single citizen of the U.S was downloading the amount of gigs that you and 'slick' download every month, then you would need caps, cause your network wouldn't be able to handle it. That's the point of caps to stop excessive usage, don't you think 500 gb's a month is excessive usage?

People like you and slick1ru2 should be happy that a lot of people still prefer to buy physical content because if they didn't and a good percentage of people turned to downloading their movies tomorrow, then it most would certainly end up having an affect on you and the way you like using the Internet.

IMO unless you are a heavy downloader of content or a business, then you don't need the highest speeds or many GB's a month, as simply browsing the Internet doesn't require much. Even here in Australia with the way our network is ATM, the speeds we currently have are way beyond fast enough for everyday web browsing, webpages load up with a blink of an eye, what more do you want?

You sound like the Bell South lineman I talked to in 1998. I was putting in a second telephone line for my 28.8 modem. I was telling him about the new 56k standard and he just could not grasp it. This wire is only rated for 7k of data. How can they do that?

Let's take your argument to 1997. Everyone has 14.4 or 28.8 modems. A few have very expensive ISDN lines and at work use T1 or T3 lines (equal to a 1 or 3 mbps line). Can you imagine if EVERYONE has an ISDN line or T1 line and is downloading 15 mb per month?!?!?! OMG?!?!?! What would happen?? Well, 15mb per month is very low number by today's standards and 65% of the U.S. has 1.5 mbps speed connections or greater. 5-10 years from now, when people are downloading 1tb and more a month, you could say can you imagine if everyone downloaded 10TB a month, which in 5-10 years time they will be doing. Everyone won't be downloading vast amounts tomorrow. But in 5-10 years, many will be. I am what's known as a technology early adapter, often ahead of the curve on such things.

Why stream large amounts of data? I want to be able to have access to a large, vastly large, library of HD movies as well as live sporting events. I have both. They require bandwidth. Thinking the internet is just for surfing websites is so 1995.

[wormraper]

also, if caps are so important why are they limiting my speed? why can't I have the highest speed available in my area and just cap me??? I mean, I'd still have to watch my download limit, so why am I being limited in my speed if it's available. wait a minute!!!! they want to charge me by my speed rate AND cap me and charge extra for more bandwidth!!!! ding ding ding they want their cake and eat it too. sorry I don't buy it.

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by wormraper

no not at all. go to places like I mentioned before and MANY users can download in the TERABYTE per month. because they actually spend the time and money to upgrade their systems. the U.S. has dropped the ball and is expecting us to pick up their tab for them. every year the web gets bigger and bigger and every year more data is being pushed through those pipes. trying to limit the amount you use is nothing but a cheap bandaid to try and stem the bloodflow out of a hemorrhaging wound.

and excessive? why?? i'm offered unlimited bandwidth. I take advantage of that. the internet is not just to check my email and browse blu-ray.com. it's my tv , my data site, my work, my hobby etc. I can do a hundred gigs just by playing around with uploading and downloading my linux distribution patches and work. 200-300 gigs is just streaming video (legally). I'm sorry the web is getting bigger and more robust yet people are saying we need to not use it as much

you'd be really surprised how much bandwidth many people in the states use too. (and in other countries). once comcast started putting their caps on friends and family started monitoring. out of curiosity (and because I'm the tech guy) they had me do the monitoring. friends who only were home 4 -5 hours a day still used between 120-180 gigs of data a month. my poor mother who's tech illiterate used 100 gigs a month. streaming video and large file sizes are just the norm today. especially since everything is moving towards digital downloads like TV, etc...

And that's good for you if the internet is your hobby, but it's not to most. My point was if everyone started using the Internet like you do tomorrow, then you wouldn't have that priveledge. Not many other countries value streaming to the extent that people in the U.S do. Btw most of the countries you mentioned are broke and will never get out of the financial hole their in, but if those countries didn't waste such large amounts of money on upgrading their Internet infrastructure when they had bigger and more important things to worry about, then maybe they would have some money.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

And that's good for you if the internet is your hobby, but it's not to most. My point was if everyone started using the Internet like you do tomorrow, then you wouldn't have that priveledge. Not many other countries value streaming to the extent that people in the U.S do. Btw most of the countries you mentioned are broke and will never get out of the financial hole their in, but if those countries didn't waste such large amounts of money on upgrading their Internet infrastructure when they had bigger and more important things to worry about, then maybe they would have some money.

lol, sorry, strawman argument. so they shouldn't upgrade now because they should spend it elsewhere. it's become pretty obvious that you literally use the internet for a few things and don't give a crap about what's becoming standard for most other people. you haven't answered the questions posed by us here and just run around in circles

and the internet is NOT my hobby. like most people I know all of our hobbies have the internet flowing through them. the internet is the LIFEBLOOD of most transactions over here in the civilized world

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by wormraper

also, if caps are so important why are they limiting my speed? why can't I have the highest speed available in my area and just cap me??? I mean, I'd still have to watch my download limit, so why am I being limited in my speed if it's available. wait a minute!!!! they want to charge me by my speed rate AND cap me and charge extra for more bandwidth!!!! ding ding ding they want their cake and eat it too. sorry I don't buy it.

Now you're getting it! Also you keep bringing up "other countries this, other countries that"...last time I checked there are no locked doors from the inside of US borders. If the system is so bad, you are free to go at anytime. Have fun in places like: Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, etc... you may get your blazing speed, but I'm sure there are other downfalls you may have to avoid!
Be sure to take Alec Baldwin with you, as he seems to think America is a horribly run country too!

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Now you're getting it! Also you keep bringing up "other countries this, other countries that"...last time I checked there are no locked doors from the inside of US borders. If the system is so bad, you are free to go at anytime. Have fun in places like: Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, etc... you may get your blazing speed, but I'm sure there are other downfalls you may have to avoid!
Be sure to take Alec Baldwin with you, as he seems to think America is a horribly run country too!

yup, it's pure manipulative greed. I most certainly AM getting it.

my point is not that we're some sh!thole country, but that people keep saying they HAVE to do this because we're using too much etc... sorry don't buy it. other countries are showing a standard, and like the rest of technology in the U.s. we're falling behind. just because I see a fault in my country doesn't mean I am going to run crying to somewhere else every second. The reason for pointing out flaws in the process of every situation of life is to IMPROVE them

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

And that's good for you if the internet is your hobby, but it's not to most. My point was if everyone started using the Internet like you do tomorrow, then you wouldn't have that priveledge. Not many other countries value streaming to the extent that people in the U.S do. Btw most of the countries you mentioned are broke and will never get out of the financial hole their in, but if those countries didn't waste such large amounts of money on upgrading their Internet infrastructure when they had bigger and more important things to worry about, then maybe they would have some money.

The reason many don't use the internet to the same extent is because many, like you, haven't grasped the potential.

Many countries value the internet more than the U.S.. One European country has said that internet access is a right.

The internet is more than a "hobby". Its used for commerce, medicine, education. These "broke" countries realize one thing. Information is power, the way to making their country better. Using the internet to help bring better education to remote areas as well as medical experts is very important work. Using the internet for sales, another way to help struggling economies.

Australia was on the cusp of having the best internet system in the world, fiber optics to 100% of the population. But I can see now why it was stopped after reading your comments. You equate the internet with TV cartoons. It is so much more than that, it was developed as a tool for universities to exchange information. Some get it, others don't. pitty.

Originally Posted by rickah88

Now you're getting it! Also you keep bringing up "other countries this, other countries that"...last time I checked there are no locked doors from the inside of US borders. If the system is so bad, you are free to go at anytime. Have fun in places like: Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, etc... you may get your blazing speed, but I'm sure there are other downfalls you may have to avoid!
Be sure to take Alec Baldwin with you, as he seems to think America is a horribly run country too!

Yes. Other countries do things better, often much better, than the U.S.. How about instead of having people leave for what's better elsewhere, maybe work on what the U.S. is lacking instead of calling up you inner Angry Ameriican.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by wormraper

yup, it's pure manipulative greed. I most certainly AM getting it.

my point is not that we're some sh!thole country, but that people keep saying they HAVE to do this because we're using too much etc... sorry don't buy it. other countries are showing a standard, and like the rest of technology in the U.s. we're falling behind. just because I see a fault in my country doesn't mean I am going to run crying to somewhere else every second. The reason for pointing out flaws in the process of every situation of life is to IMPROVE them

I've seen every piece of technology improve, exponentially in my 40 years of life....ditto for energy usage. We do have a standard here, and it's very simple, but you're just holding your breath & stamping your feet trying to ignore it: You get what you pay for!
That works on both ends of the spectrum. This isn't exactly new territory being explored here, this type of business sense has been going on for a few hundred years!
Internet usage is no different!

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by rickah88

I've seen every piece of technology improve, exponentially in my 40 years of life....ditto for energy usage. We do have a standard here, and it's very simple, but you're just holding your breath & stamping your feet trying to ignore it: You get what you pay for!
That works on both ends of the spectrum. This isn't exactly new territory being explored here, this type of business sense has been going on for a few hundred years!
Internet usage is no different!

When you pay more and get less its called substandard. Its been like that for hundreds of years too.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by rickah88

I've seen every piece of technology improve, exponentially in my 40 years of life....ditto for energy usage. We do have a standard here, and it's very simple, but you're just holding your breath & stamping your feet trying to ignore it: You get what you pay for!
That works on both ends of the spectrum. This isn't exactly new territory being explored here, this type of business sense has been going on for a few hundred years!
Internet usage is no different!

lol, I know, I DO get what I pay for. it's called tiered speeds. if they start cutting deeply into my internet speeds and start capping you'll be REALLY surprised at how a TON of other businesses get hurt. Netflix and other high bandwidth sites will see a decrease and be damaged etc. I'm not going to take it. like every other thing in life I have a price point. if they push past my price point I laugh at them and kick them to the curb (or mooch off of someone else ). we have a few people in here who use minimal net and say "not my problem" to anyone who uses it like it was intended (unfettered constant use for everything in life )

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

When you pay more and get less its called substandard. Its been like that for hundreds of years too.

yup, exactly.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

When you pay more and get less its called substandard. Its been like that for hundreds of years too.

So you have 2 options:
Agree to pay, or don't! It's that simple.
If you don't agree, then you can write your Congressperson and hope for the best.
Also a distant 3rd option is complaining about it on blu-ray.com forums...although I don't know much of a fix to the problem that will provide!

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by rickah88

So you have 2 options:
Agree to pay, or don't! It's that simple.
If you don't agree, then you can write your Congressperson and hope for the best.
Also a distant 3rd option is complaining about it on blu-ray.com forums...although I don't know much of a fix to the problem that will provide!

oh don't worry, I do both. I already write my congressmen and when I had a company that had crappy service like that I quit them and moved to a company with no limitations like that.

AND I complain on blu-ray.com. it's a beautiful world isn't it.

since this is a DISCUSSION forum I see no reason not to