Comcast looking to limit download again - TimeWarner too

Well, am sure Comcast is reading this right now!! Gp to their SIM and let them know how you feel!

http://slurl.com/secondlife/Comcast/16.9129/231.141

I still have faith in technological fixes.

It seems to me that eventually most end user connections will be wireless broadband of some type, much faster than what we have now.

Comcast has a monopoly in many places, but it is temporary in nature because technological change cannot really be stopped.

They ought to look out. If they anger us too much now, we're all that much more happy to change providers when the high bandwidth descendant of WiMax comes to town.

Traffic, well, not only Australia has limits.
How you would like 512kbit/s for 100US$(with 30 Gb limit,after limit expired speed drops to 32 kbit/s),that's download

Sorry, but I do not agree. You are being ironic, I hope? Your paragraph is an extreme example of precisely the "unlikely doomsday" scenario you descried. It's impossible to make any such prediction.

Bandwidth is not a resource. The network is the resource. Bandwidth is a measure of its capacity per unit of time. Build more capacity, and you can have more bandwidth. Moreover, changes in network technology can offer either more bandwidth per unit of time... or offer a change that increases the value of existing bandwidth, such as more efficient compression.

We can't "run out of bandwidth" the same way we can "run out of water" or "run out of corn," but there is a limit, and that limit is determined by the network's parts, and its technology, so it's under the control of the network owner.

Comcast prefers to tell you that your fellow users are "hogging" bandwidth, rather than improve their network so that it supplies demand. It's cheaper for them, and less risky, since there are seldom competitors who can offer comparable bandwidth.

The main point I take away from the OP is that Comcast sold their service with promises of huge bandwidths, and now, after the customers are signed up for their service, Comcast tries to reduce their commitment to provide that bandwidth. In other words, Comcast encouraged the demand, promised to provide it, and now seeks to avoid doing so.

Ok Welleran, then why do my interwebs tubes always get clogged, delaying my incoming emails for weeks at a time?

It wasn't my prediction. It was the "experts" in the field of internet bandwithry.

You can read the article here:
http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/90339

And you only reinforced my point. We won't run out if there are upgrades. But upgrades cost money. so quitcherbichin about having to pay

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/02/AR2008060202214.html

For now this is just a "trial".

I'd like to get a reality check on how restrictive this is. Does anyone know how much bandwidth SL typically uses (per day or per hour)? All the hi-res snapshots I have downloaded in 2 years add up to only 2 GB, but I expect that all the textures, sound, video, etc. use a lot more bandwidth. Does the preprocessing done on the client add a lot of upload bandwidth?

Considering that most people don't use anywhere near that amount, and pay the same price, I think this is hogwash.

I was surprised after installing a bandwidth meter to see how much I used with moderately heavy use of SL. I was testing to see whether or not getting a wireless broadband package for my laptop would be feasible. NOT with the way I use SL! If I didn't use SL, I could stay under 5GB/month, but no way... I'd have to use AjaxLife or something like it instead. With heavy SL usage (several hours/night), even at 64-96 draw distance on average, and kicking up the cache to the max, I would probably meet, but would likely exceed the 250gb/month, whereas I think if my roommate used 1GB, she used a lot.

The service provider I use to host my websites gives me 5TB a month of bandwidth for my sites. Cost? $6.95 a month, including the hosting, storage, php scripting, databases, etc. etc.

$6.95 a month.

Seems to me that ISPs could provide all the bandwidth necessary at a very reasonable price. If they wanted to.

My satellite isp is Wild Blue (Dishnet), and I get 17GB in any 30 day period (moving window).

So far, I have not exceeded about about 11GB, as a moderate SL user (Couple hours per day, max).

Also, my ping times are 1.5 seconds. Nice, eh? Damn satellites are so far away. I can hardly wait for terrestrial balloon internet.