NEW THREAT TO WINMX & P2P

[birdy]

is there no benefit it what this link suggests for our winmx please ?

http://azureus.aelitis.com/wiki/index.php/Message_Stream_Encryption

[KM]

you can not just change the protocol that your winmx uses - the protocol changes they use are just how they chose to do it, and changing the winmx protocol is easy - however personally i would prefer my winmx to be able to communicate with the rest of the network rather than change it so it's not compatible with anything else, and i'm sure everyone else would prefer the same

[SamSeeSam]

I don't think that it is likely that all the ISP's will start blocking P2P's. If you are unsatisfied with an ISP, then you can change to another one. Then that effects the Isp you have disconnected. He then loses money. The the person who allows it will get more applications. It does make a difference if you disconnect from that ISP. He then has the option to either reallow P2P traffic or lose more people.
It is more likely either all will allow P2P traffic or none will. You must also keep in mind that all of them are rivals. All of them in their hearts want to have more subscribers no matter what the method. If P2P is one of the way, the let it be. It's more money to them. So I bet on all of them allowing it. Do also keep in mind that P2P is not all that illegal. If you have the files you share that is. It's like beer. Most people know it's not good for health and.... reasons. Yet many people who know this fact still drink it drink.

I don't at least in my lifetime see that Microsoft will come together with other OS manufactures to create a uniform code, ie any program written in one OS to be able to run on all other OS. I think that in a crude way, the same concept applies to P2P as well in my opinion.

[KM]

there is a slight flaw in your reasoning though, they WANT to get rid of the heavy use customers - they WANT their rivals to have all the expensive ones... They sell the service based on the fact that they can oversell it, heavy users do not make them any money but in fact lose them money (as it costs more for them to support that user than the users subscription is worth) the business model they use is basically that the small number of users that they are subsidising the costs are covered by the larger number of users who don't use the connection for much more than checking their email - they have no problem at all with getting rid of those loss making customers

The price it costs an ISP to deliver the service obviously varies on ISP sizes (bulk pricing and all) however you will typically find it costs £50/Mbit of transit although by bulk buying and using only low quality transit (no major ISP uses just low quality transit... but if they did) then it can be as low as about £20/Mbit, that is just for getting their data out to the internet, without them paying all of their other costs, staffing, equipment, and in the case of ADSL ISPs a huge fee to BT for the ADSL line (which is often more than half of the amount you are paying for the connection) then another huge fee to BT for getting data from your ADSL line to the ISP (not sure the rates for that, only that it is a lot more expensive than the cost for transit)

so if you are paying say £25 for a 2Mbit connection, and £15 of that goes to BT for the line, that is £10/month they are getting from you - that £10/month has to pay for all of their equipment costs, as well as paying for the data twice (ie. once from BT to them then again out to the internet) so if you maxed out 2Mbit 24/7... you cost them a lot of money, and they want rid of you...

[birdy]

agreed KM but where do we go ? as i have stated most isps are now doing it wether they inform there customers or not me and a friend spenat ages lookin into isps and wow very hard to find one that is not traffic shaping, is this the end of p2p ?
i know isps want the likes of us of their networks they want online game players of the x box and such we are heavy useres but was ok for them to exploit and use at one point now we are not good enough . ow well lets hope one day someone comes along with something to get around traffic shaping so we can stick our fingers up not only to the RIAA but the isps who think they have won, LONG LIVE WINMX !!!!!

[KM]

you go to an ISP that doesn't use BT ADSL lines so doesn't have that huge cost, and has their own network with plenty of capacity to handle users so has no need for monthly usage limits or traffic shaping

[SamSeeSam]

I must say I didn't think from that point of view. That is a powerful point against me. ( Just the way I like it )But there are still two things

All of them are rivals. Nothing, Not even P2P changes that.
Secondly and most importantly, the costs will come down in time. Broadband is relatively new in terms of years. Just about five years. The number of broadband users is and will grow at rapid pace and also, technology will improve to bring costs down. Even if all of them come together, nothing is going to stop them from investing in ways that may reduce their costs, eg new technology, fibre optics, etc.
All this is and will bring the costs down. And in time, they may lift the ban on P2P's once it doesn't make a big difference in terms of per mb cost. That will then give a big boost in the no of custemors
That may still be a few years away Agreed. But it is there.

Still though it is there in the future, we are now in the present So we need to figure out how to get around this problem. The best method in my opinion is to limit our downloads and uploads to just below which the ISP's cannot detect you . That may be one of the best ways to counteract this problem. I must confess my ignorance about computers and winmx at the higher level. But I do know fools who know nothing about winmx think seeing that I am one myself. I know this may seem a bit silly sugession. But it may be one of the more effective ways to prevent more ISP's from turning their backs on Winmx. More the no of Isp's turning hostile, more is the no of Isp's getting bad users and the chiken or egg cycle begins again.

I must suggest that all of us must visit this url. It gives the idea of costs of broadband in various countries:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadband_Internet_access#Satellite_Internet

[SamSeeSam]

I forgot to point this out yesterday. Look in the section of Japan. They say that a 100mbbs costs 50$. That's 0.5$/Mbit  :shock: That is very cheap compared to the amount you have quoted. But there was something about FTTH. Please enlighten me on what exactly is this. I presume that is is a different technology from Adsl. I never knew that you could get speeds so cheap. My family pays about 15$ for a 256kpps connection.  But that is a lot of money here. To get a 2 mbbs connection, you have to pay about 42000 rupees. That's approximately 940 $  :shock: :shock: And this is among the cheapest connection i am talking here. The ISP I use is MTNL, a government based telephone company. Here is their tariff website. 1$ ~ 45 rupees.

http://mumbai.mtnl.net.in/triband/htm/tariff.htm

But before I comment furthur, could you direct me to a site where they give the Broadband Fee structure in your countries.

Thanks
Sam

[KM]

that is the price for a 100Mbit connection to the ISP which is shared with other customers, not the going rate for 100Mbit of bandwidth - a connection that can burst up to 100Mbit is not the same as 100Mbit of bandwidth

look at the prices for leased lines - the reason they are so much more expensive is that you are paying for that much bandwidth, not merely for a shared connection of that speed to the ISP

ISPs make money because they oversell, a typical home connection has a maximum contention ratio of 50:1, meaning that the bandwidth is shared between up to 50 users! (ie. if they have 10Mbit worth of bandwidth available, they could stick up to 500 1Mbit users on it) of course they often don't max out at the full 50 but they do use a lot of contention and that means counting on the fact that users do not use it - as they sell faster and faster connections to home users they do increase their capacity a bit but certainly not enough to actually deliver those speed increases, they rely solely on the fact that most users won't even use a fraction of the bandwidth they have available... that is why a business connection is more expensive (maximum of 20:1 contention in most cases) because they can fit less users on the shared bandwidth, and a leased line is even more expensive because no contention is used - that much bandwidth is dedicated to a single customer

[birdy]

i think this link is relivent to this thread

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/4905660.stm

[SamSeeSam]

What exactly is the difference between DSL and Broadband?

[KM]

"Broadband" is a term they use to basically mean "it's not dialup, pay more for it" - DSL is one category of non-dialup connection (meaning basically a connection over a phone line)

[SamSeeSam]

What are their differences in terms of cost and speeds avaiable ?

[KM]

same reason there are different costs/types of bread... you have different companies selling different bread for different prices

you have different companies selling different speed connections for different prices