# Time Warner is about to fuck you the fuck up **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 3, 2008, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664 "2008-06-03T18:41:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 7:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/41 "2008-06-04T07:37:35Z")
[QUOTE=Rysto] I have cable, and I’d be ecstatic to get 768 Kbps sustained. [/QUOTE] OK, just to make sure we’re all using the same metric, [test your speed here.](http://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/) I have Comcast, and I’m getting 12,374 Kbps download speed at the Chicago server, and slightly faster (?) at the Seattle server. What numbers are you getting? ---
**Author:** ![Mellivora\_capensis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8797f3/32.png) [@Mellivora\_capensis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mellivora_capensis)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 11:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/42 "2008-06-04T11:14:13Z")
> [@](#): > > 12,374 Kbps > [@](#): > > [MLB.TV](http://MLB.TV) > [@](#): > > SDMB > [@](#): > > 800K > [@](#): > > 40gig > [@](#): > > TWC > [@](#): > > 768/8(x0.9\*)=86,4KB/s > [@](#): > > 33.6Kbps, ISDN is 128Kbps > [@](#): > > FiOS or DSL > [@](#): > > Kbps is one eighth of KBps > [@](#): > > Your G theoretically runs at 54Mbit/s. So, basically 54,000Kb/s > [@](#): > > 2-3 gigs of patches Jesus, my head hurts. I think there’s only one of those I understand. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/43 "2008-06-04T12:19:44Z")
One news article pointed out that watching 3 HD movies in a month would put you over the top and cause additional charges. Which is the point I was trying to make earlier…more and more movies will be in HD, and more movies will be watched thru Internet connections instead of cable TV, so the average user will start to feel the effects of the clampdown before long. When that happens, the cable company can’t claim it’s just the power users abusing the system, and it becomes a surcharge that most everyone pays; i.e., a price increase. Which brings me to another point…cable companies are always encouraging use of TV channels; they don’t throttle that use. If they are running an all-IP system, watching a movie on TV channel 9 is essentially the same data traffic as watching it thru an Internet download. But now they’re going to penalize you for doing it one way but not the other? That’s just a price increase pure and simple. ---
**Author:** ![FarmerChick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@FarmerChick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FarmerChick)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/44 "2008-06-04T13:29:07Z")
[QUOTE=Mellivora capensis] Jesus, my head hurts. I think there’s only one of those I understand. [/QUOTE] You and me both! I thought this was going to be a fun pitting, but I, like you, don’t understand anything these guys are spouting. Are the geeks having a pissing match? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/45 "2008-06-04T13:52:31Z")
[QUOTE=Gukumatz] Are you sure you’re on a "."768 line? How fast are your downloads? (The rule of thumb is that your line number describes in Kbits, while your download stream is described in KBytes, and a bit is 1/8 of a Byte, so your download speed should be 1/8 of your line capacity, i.e. 768/8(x0.9\*)=86,4KB/s. That equals to around 5mb per minute, which is slow this day and age.) And considering you downloaded HL2 in around 45 minutes (i.e. 225mb with the above, uniform formula) that doesn’t sound quite right. (Sorry if I seem like a condescending jerk or anything, I’m just really tired and trying to stay awake, and my brain jumped at the maths involved to keep itself occupied) \*You can usually shave off 10% capacity for overhead. [/QUOTE] HL2 is something like 1.3 gig, not 225mb. Isn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Zakalwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zakalwe/32/270_2.png) [@Zakalwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zakalwe)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/46 "2008-06-04T17:32:30Z")
[QUOTE=Rysto] If you’re a residential customer, you aren’t getting guaranteed bandwidth. And you know that, so kindly quit it with that strawman. [/QUOTE] But what if you were? Or at least what if you were truly capped on bandwidth? Now why would they care if you use that bandwidth 24/7? The answer, as has been mentioned several times already is that this is not about fairly proportioning fees to usage, but is simply a way to increase prices without looking like they’re doing it. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/47 "2008-06-04T17:43:24Z")
> [@](#): > > 12,374 Kbps Big number. > [@](#): > > [MLB.TV](http://MLB.TV) Streaming coverage of baseball games provided for a fee by Major League Baseball, the governing body of baseball in the US. > [@](#): > > SDMB 😃 > [@](#): > > 800K The apartment next to 800J. > [@](#): > > 40gig Forty gigabytes… or 40,000,000,000 bytes. I think. > [@](#): > > TWC Time Warner Cable, the largest provider of premium TV and broadband internet service in the US. > [@](#): > > 768/8(x0.9\*)=86,4KB/s > 33.6Kbps, ISDN is 128Kbps > FiOS or DSL > Kbps is one eighth of KBps > Your G theoretically runs at 54Mbit/s. So, basically 54,000Kb/s > 2-3 gigs of patches 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/48 "2008-06-04T17:48:32Z")
[QUOTE=pulykamell] OK, just to make sure we’re all using the same metric, [test your speed here.](http://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/) I have Comcast, and I’m getting 12,374 Kbps download speed at the Chicago server, and slightly faster (?) at the Seattle server. What numbers are you getting? [/QUOTE] I may have been wrong about this. Apparently Firefox reports download speed in KB/s, not kbps like I’m used to. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/49 "2008-06-04T17:51:18Z")
[QUOTE=Rysto] I may have been wrong about this. Apparently Firefox reports download speed in KB/s, not kbps like I’m used to. [/QUOTE] It’s not just Firefox. I think every application I’ve ever had reports transfer speeds in KB/s. edit: Yeah, even UNIX ftp gives me transfer speeds in KB or KBytes/sec. ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/50 "2008-06-04T18:04:59Z")
[QUOTE=Musicat] Which is the point I was trying to make earlier…more and more movies will be in HD, and more movies will be watched thru Internet connections instead of cable TV, so the average user will start to feel the effects of the clampdown before long. When that happens, the cable company can’t claim it’s just the power users abusing the system, and it becomes a surcharge that most everyone pays; i.e., a price increase. [/quote] So the basis of your complaint is that if people start using more bandwidth, they will have to pay more? > [@](#): > > Which brings me to another point…cable companies are always encouraging use of TV channels; they don’t throttle that use. If they are running an all-IP system, watching a movie on TV channel 9 is essentially the same data traffic as watching it thru an Internet download. But now they’re going to penalize you for doing it one way but not the other? That’s just a price increase pure and simple. IP and cable television have basically nothing in common. > [@Zakalwe](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > If you’re a residential customer, you aren’t getting guaranteed bandwidth. And you know that, so kindly quit it with that strawman. > > But what if you were? Or at least what if you were truly capped on bandwidth? Now why would they care if you use that bandwidth 24/7? If you were getting guaranteed bandwidth from your ISP, you’d be paying a heck of a lot more and then no, they wouldn’t care how much bandwidth you used. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/51 "2008-06-04T18:08:21Z")
I’m getting between 2,000 and 2,800 kbps at work. Oddly, the Atlanta server (closest one to me by far) is slower than the others. I’ll have to try this at home later. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/52 "2008-06-04T18:17:31Z")
Actually, I do have one factual question here. I just checked my throughput speeds, and I’ve got 13,374/Kbps download and 361/Kbps upload. Is this normal? First of all, I didn’t think my download speeds are supposed to be that high (I thought I had something like 6 or 7 Gbps), but all the speed checks online agree with that number. Second, why the hell is upload so slow? It’s always been this way. I upload about one to two gigabytes worth of data a week, and it takes me a good 18-24 hours to complete. Is it normal for uploads to be _that_ much slower? ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/53 "2008-06-04T18:19:36Z")
Cable upload bandwidth sucks. It’s a fundamental limitation of the technology. That’s one of the reasons cable ISPs have such problems with P2P – having their customers uploading huge files is not something their networks can handle very well. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/54 "2008-06-04T18:22:15Z")
[QUOTE=Rysto] Cable upload bandwidth sucks. It’s a fundamental limitation of the technology. That’s one of the reasons cable ISPs have such problems with P2P – having their customers uploading huge files is not something their networks can handle very well. [/QUOTE] Yes, I just noticed. I was uploading 35 MB to my server and did the download speed test – wow. Somehow, just uploading something at a rate of 361 Kbps ramped down my download speeds to, get this, just over 200 Kbps. WTF? Where the hell did all that bandwith go? ---
**Author:** ![Achren](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/898d66/32.png) [@Achren](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Achren)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/55 "2008-06-04T19:15:51Z")
Would something like a flat fee + a fee based on the amount of bandwidth used per month work? Or would that create too many headaches? ---
**Author:** ![SmartAleq](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smartaleq/32/163_2.png) [@SmartAleq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmartAleq)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/56 "2008-06-04T22:51:39Z")
I’m getting 1001 kbps down, 289 kbps up on a wireless G connection to a DSL router. Just for comparison’s sake. That was from a Seattle server–I’m in Portland. I’d like to see some concrete proof that ISP’s are barely scraping by because I’m not feeling their pain. How about getting some of their money back from the providers of content since they’re the ones causing the issue? If a site is making money from the traffic it inspires, why shouldn’t it share with the ISP’s? Truckers pay higher road taxes than passenger cars for just this reason–they overuse the infrastructure. Why should the end user be the only source of revenue? ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/57 "2008-06-04T23:07:24Z")
[QUOTE=SmartAleq] How about getting some of their money back from the providers of content since they’re the ones causing the issue? [/QUOTE] They do – content providers need to be provisioned with a lot more bandwidth than a typical end user, for which their ISPs charge accordingly. ---
**Author:** ![bouv](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bc8723/32.png) [@bouv](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bouv)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/58 "2008-06-04T23:37:39Z")
[QUOTE=SmartAleq] I’d like to see some concrete proof that ISP’s are barely scraping by because I’m not feeling their pain. [/QUOTE] From what I know, they are still raking in profits. Once the infrastructure is set-up (which it is,) then the costs if keeping the bandwidth isn’t hard. Whether you personally use your connection at it’s maximum 24/7, or use it once a day to check email, the cost difference to TWC isn’t much. Someone can correct me if I’m wrong, though. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2008, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/59 "2008-06-04T23:55:59Z")
[QUOTE=Rysto] So the basis of your complaint is that if people start using more bandwidth, they will have to pay more? [/quote] Yes. My ISP charges a fixed rate no matter how much I use (up to the guaranteed speed). I don’t pay more if I use more, why should they? > [@](#): > > IP and cable television have basically nothing in common. They have _everything_ in common. In all-IP based systems, the same pipe carries all signals as IP packets: telephone, cable TV shows, Internet access. That’s the way my hookup works. > [@](#): > > If you were getting guaranteed bandwidth from your ISP, you’d be paying a heck of a lot more and then no, they wouldn’t care how much bandwidth you used. My company doesn’t seem to care, and yes, I am getting what I was promised and paying what I expected. At least so far. It’s honest and fair to everyone. My complaint about the new billing concept is this: I am promised a level of service for a certain price because the ISP doesn’t expect everyone to need 100% of the service 100% of the time. But if I actually use it as promised, the ISP says, “We didn’t really mean YOU and we didn’t expect you to take us up on our offer – you are abusing the system.” ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2008, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664/60 "2008-06-05T00:04:10Z")
[QUOTE=pulykamell] Yes, I just noticed. I was uploading 35 MB to my server and did the download speed test – wow. Somehow, just uploading something at a rate of 361 Kbps ramped down my download speeds to, get this, just over 200 Kbps. WTF? Where the hell did all that bandwith go? [/QUOTE] You are using the fixed-width pipe to send data at the same time as the test? And you’re surprised that one affects the other? How else would it work? No speed test is valid if other things are running at the same time. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-warner-is-about-to-fuck-you-the-fuck-up/451664.md?page=4)