Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
WHAT ARE YOU THINKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW?
Posts
NoblemanNick
View playlists
Close
Hahahahaha the Time Warner new Internet capping is the biggest crock of shit I've seen this month.
Here's the cap/price, going over costs $1/GB:
5 GB: $29.99/month
10 GB: $39.99/month
20 GB: $49.99/month
40 GB: $54.90/ month
Hahaha what a fucking stupid idea
Here's the cap/price, going over costs $1/GB:
5 GB: $29.99/month
10 GB: $39.99/month
20 GB: $49.99/month
40 GB: $54.90/ month
Hahaha what a fucking stupid idea
Natook
1000
Haha you could just get the 5 GB and go over 5-15 gigs and it'll be cheaper than just paying for the 10-20 gig limits, but not the last one.
Missed some tiers:
1GB: $15/month ($2 per GB over the limit)
100GB: $75/month
320GB: $220/month (rumor though)
1GB: $15/month ($2 per GB over the limit)
100GB: $75/month
320GB: $220/month (rumor though)
Natook
1000
Nobody anywhere would ever pay $220 for internet. You'd have to be stealing the internet itself to do that.
News link: http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2009/tc20090331_726397.htm
(google it for more recent developments)
Also I completely agree that anybody with a brain wouldn't pay these rediculous rates except those with no other Internet providers (which I think is where they're testing this)
author=GreatRedSpirit link=topic=1013.msg70191#msg70191 date=1239326484
Hahahahaha the Time Warner new Internet capping is the biggest crock of shit I've seen this month.
Here's the cap/price, going over costs $1/GB:
5 GB: $29.99/month
10 GB: $39.99/month
20 GB: $49.99/month
40 GB: $54.90/ month
Hahaha what a fucking stupid idea
Fucking explain this megaretarded shit to me, please?
author=Max McGee link=topic=1013.msg70427#msg70427 date=1239557711
Fucking explain this megaretarded shit to me, please?
Somebody doesn't like their customers enjoying Netflix and other Download HiDef TV/Movies services using one of their services (Internet) and negating another of their services (Cable TV). Some bullshit excuses and targetting areas that they have a monopoly in later and you get CrockO'Shit.
I think the cable companies are retarded for being so blatant about what they are doing, but I am not totally against having tiered service levels. I actually blame the "consumer" -- trust me, it's not streaming Netflix movies that is burdening the infrastructure, it's pirates and their torrents.*
*Note: I realize the bittorrent protocol has several legal uses. I also know that that said legal uses account for only a fraction of total torrent traffic.
*Note: I realize the bittorrent protocol has several legal uses. I also know that that said legal uses account for only a fraction of total torrent traffic.
You can have your tiered Internet. I'll take the 250GB for $40/month from Comcast (who isn't indirectly competing with itself) so that my household can use Youtube, Hulu, Netflix, Steam, sending data to/from work, and who knows what'll come up in the future without getting slapped by rediculous prices and overcharge fees.
Sure pirates eat up a lot of bandwith but this isn't 2003; High bandwidth services are being used by common Internet users, just not the saavy ones that know ThePirateBay exists. It's easy for a regular household to use up a lot of bandwidth without touching Bittorrent or any P2P service. The infrastructure is in danger but pirates are only a peice of the pie: The millions of users whose bandwidth usage shot through the rough is a significant factor (and its growth).
For more fun of what bullshit this is, look at Time Warner's 10-K. $4B revenue (12% incresae from last year), $146M expenses (decreased 11% from last year) on High-Speed Data. Not counting employee cost (since there's no indication of how much of that goes to employees involved with the Internet) and the only thing that beats out the Internet's profit is *gasp* TV which Internet services compete with!
*edit*
More cost-related stuff. 100% bittorrent free!
Sure pirates eat up a lot of bandwith but this isn't 2003; High bandwidth services are being used by common Internet users, just not the saavy ones that know ThePirateBay exists. It's easy for a regular household to use up a lot of bandwidth without touching Bittorrent or any P2P service. The infrastructure is in danger but pirates are only a peice of the pie: The millions of users whose bandwidth usage shot through the rough is a significant factor (and its growth).
For more fun of what bullshit this is, look at Time Warner's 10-K. $4B revenue (12% incresae from last year), $146M expenses (decreased 11% from last year) on High-Speed Data. Not counting employee cost (since there's no indication of how much of that goes to employees involved with the Internet) and the only thing that beats out the Internet's profit is *gasp* TV which Internet services compete with!
*edit*
More cost-related stuff. 100% bittorrent free!
I guessed you missed the part where everyone was pissed off when Comcast (which, contrary to your statement, is heavily involved in the television business as well -- largest cable provider in the United States, as well as owning several channels) introduced their bandwidth cap, with the exact same arguments you just made. In fact, it was one of the biggest shit storms I have ever seen on the internet.
The fact remains that the AVERAGE user will still never come anywhere close to those caps through normal use of the internet, and those that abuse the current system are those who are putting them at risk.
As for the SEC 10-K filings, I am happy that you can read but also disheartened that you are shocked that businesses are trying to profit from their services. I also noticed you choose not to note the savings they had on high speed data were paltry and were more than offset by other, much larger expenses in things that provide support for the high speed data, such as employee salaries, operating costs and VOIP upgrades.
The fact remains that the AVERAGE user will still never come anywhere close to those caps through normal use of the internet, and those that abuse the current system are those who are putting them at risk.
As for the SEC 10-K filings, I am happy that you can read but also disheartened that you are shocked that businesses are trying to profit from their services. I also noticed you choose not to note the savings they had on high speed data were paltry and were more than offset by other, much larger expenses in things that provide support for the high speed data, such as employee salaries, operating costs and VOIP upgrades.
My bad with Comcast, they fooled me with how they were handling the growth if streaming media via the Internet compared to Time Warner. And I never saw any shitstorm but I also admit that I only hang out in places where people who use 300GB+ of bandwidth recognize it and don't throw their hats in the air.
I did mention employee salaries and everything else you mentioned for the same reasons: You can't differentiate each as they're related between the Internet and Cable. Plus they can do whatever they want with their rates to increase profits but that doesn't make them immune to being called out for the shit they're pulling. All they are doing is exploiting the areas where they have a monopoly so I apologize for getting angry at that kind of exploitation.
If you don't think the average user can eat through 10GB a month (never mind the huge difference between that TW and Comcast are offering) then there isn't much else to say besides
I did mention employee salaries and everything else you mentioned for the same reasons: You can't differentiate each as they're related between the Internet and Cable. Plus they can do whatever they want with their rates to increase profits but that doesn't make them immune to being called out for the shit they're pulling. All they are doing is exploiting the areas where they have a monopoly so I apologize for getting angry at that kind of exploitation.
If you don't think the average user can eat through 10GB a month (never mind the huge difference between that TW and Comcast are offering) then there isn't much else to say besides
Your reply lost cool points for... is that CD-i Zelda?!
Comcast's cap is essentially one that doesn't exist -- only the most blatant of offenders are affected by it. Still, it provoked a lot of outrage a couple of years ago for essentially no reason. I think the higher tiers of the Time Warner cap is outrageous, but I like the idea of a tier in theory. There are a lot of subscribers who pay for high speed data that only get a fraction of the use that your or I get out of the internets, but they still pay full price. In effect, they are subsidizing our internet bills.
As for the 10-K stuff, just because it doesn't breakdown the other expenses by media category doesn't mean we can just choose to ignore them -- even if only a small fraction of them were high speed data related, it would entirely negate the "savings". As for the monopoly issue, I am not sure where you live at, but in most cities these days you have a choice of several high speed internet providers, though I usually end up going with the cable company because I think the phone companies are even more evil. :(
Your subtle sarcasm is duly noted.
Comcast's cap is essentially one that doesn't exist -- only the most blatant of offenders are affected by it. Still, it provoked a lot of outrage a couple of years ago for essentially no reason. I think the higher tiers of the Time Warner cap is outrageous, but I like the idea of a tier in theory. There are a lot of subscribers who pay for high speed data that only get a fraction of the use that your or I get out of the internets, but they still pay full price. In effect, they are subsidizing our internet bills.
As for the 10-K stuff, just because it doesn't breakdown the other expenses by media category doesn't mean we can just choose to ignore them -- even if only a small fraction of them were high speed data related, it would entirely negate the "savings". As for the monopoly issue, I am not sure where you live at, but in most cities these days you have a choice of several high speed internet providers, though I usually end up going with the cable company because I think the phone companies are even more evil. :(
Your subtle sarcasm is duly noted.
I agree that tiers can be a good thing if done correctly. Something like 50GB for $20 and 250GB for $40 would be a reasonable compromise: You don't fuck people over for using some streamed media but if they are going to be renting a handful of videos over the 'net or watching an entire show series in a month then you'll pay for it. Time Warner's implementation is a complete joke (and I can see how I made it seem like I was against tiers completely instead of just TW, apologies for that)
As for the monopolies, it's my understanding that TW is the only ISP in the area (or all other ISPs use TW's cables and subject to their decisions). Some of the test areas are between TW and Earthlink (using TW's cables, can't say if this will actually be an issue since there hasn't been a public announcement on it yet) although from previous experiences with a similar situation back in the days of dial up (yesss 14.4kbps modem) when the big company rocks the shrimps below usually have to adapt/die. I'm hoping that this won't be the case but I really don't believe that the smaller ISPs will continue to function normally when their lifeblood shrinks up. I think the correct way of thinking of the monopoly would be not being an Internet provider but being the guy who owns the only communication cables that everybody else has to use.
I probably shouldn't be posting anecdotal evidence
Also the CD-i videos were so bad they were hilarious. I think I have one with that hidious Link rolling his eyes somewhere
(also I am terrible at remembering the facts and my mind is all messed up so I'll quit embarrising myself further with paragraphs written by a third grader)
As for the monopolies, it's my understanding that TW is the only ISP in the area (or all other ISPs use TW's cables and subject to their decisions). Some of the test areas are between TW and Earthlink (using TW's cables, can't say if this will actually be an issue since there hasn't been a public announcement on it yet) although from previous experiences with a similar situation back in the days of dial up (yesss 14.4kbps modem) when the big company rocks the shrimps below usually have to adapt/die. I'm hoping that this won't be the case but I really don't believe that the smaller ISPs will continue to function normally when their lifeblood shrinks up. I think the correct way of thinking of the monopoly would be not being an Internet provider but being the guy who owns the only communication cables that everybody else has to use.
Also the CD-i videos were so bad they were hilarious. I think I have one with that hidious Link rolling his eyes somewhere
(also I am terrible at remembering the facts and my mind is all messed up so I'll quit embarrising myself further with paragraphs written by a third grader)
Orig
44
Just saw Princess Bride. Now I know what everyone was talking about in that one movie thread...
But I also feel like I missed out on something that should be a vital piece of their childhood by seeing it for the first time at 16. Ah well. :-\
But I also feel like I missed out on something that should be a vital piece of their childhood by seeing it for the first time at 16. Ah well. :-\
