Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

1. 

   Anonymous Coward, 22 Apr 2010 @ 8:36pm

   
   

   carlo skype wants net neutrality because they need the p2p aspects to make their network go. otherwise they are out of business. they leech bandwidth to make their business viable.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

2. 

   Anonymous Coward, 22 Apr 2010 @ 8:38pm

   
   

   Carlo,
   
   Get some facts straight..,
   Qwest has the largest internet fiber backbone in the United States, and the 2nd largest internet backbone in the World. Provides fiber connections to 95% of all the Fortune 500 companies. And is one of only 3 backbone service providers for the U.S. Government. It's not the small fry company you make it out to be.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

3. 

   Anonymous Coward, 22 Apr 2010 @ 8:41pm

   
   

   Re:

   Delete this comment, wrong post

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

4. 

   Anonymous Coward, 22 Apr 2010 @ 10:07pm

   
   

   echoback

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

5. 

   Anonymous Coward, 22 Apr 2010 @ 10:10pm

   
   

   Re:

   well I can't find any sources right now, but the technical term when you say something in a phone and you hear your echo back is called echo back or echoback (I forget if it's one word or two).

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

6. 

   mjb5406 (profile), 23 Apr 2010 @ 1:26am

   
   

   You Nailed It, Mike

   When I started reading your post, the first thing that popped into my mind was Skype's exclusive deal with Verizon, basically cutting off every other mobile carriers' customers from Skype Mobile. What I find even more disingenuous is, when you look at the Skype Mobile site, they actually have a sign-up where they will alert you when your current cell contract is up so you can switch to Verizon Wireless! That takes a lot of balls... and I think it'll just be a matter of time before Skype blocks alternative mobile programs, like Fring and iSkoot, from accessing its network. Great "neutrality"... neutral only if you have Verizon... anyone else, they tell you to get screwed.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

7. 

   Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2010 @ 4:49am

   
   

   Re:

   How can they leech bandwidth if their customers are the ones paying for it? It's not like they keep half the packets each customer sends in a vault somewhere.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

8. 

   abc gum, 23 Apr 2010 @ 4:51am

   
   

   Re:

   Please explain, exactly, how p2p "leeches" bw.
   Extra credit for a real life example.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

9. 

   not "the AC", 23 Apr 2010 @ 4:54am

   
   

   Re: Re: Look at ME I'm Perfect

   No, let's leave it here as a monument to "the AC".

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

10. 

    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2010 @ 5:06am

    
    

    Re: Re:

    skype will often use your computer to pass traffic for others. you could not make a single skype call and use plenty of bandwidth supporting the skype product anyway. you are basically reselling bandwidth to them which is against your customer agreement when you get residential service from an isp.

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

11. 

    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2010 @ 5:07am

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Look at ME I'm Perfect

    except it was the ac just an ac.

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

12. 

    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2010 @ 5:45am

    
    

    Re: Re: Re:

    Wait is this true? TAM, did you make an argument based on logic? Is this actually how skype works? Of course, screw the customer agreement with a rake, but if they do use your badnwidth for calls other than your own, how much consent/information on that is there? I'm guessing there is a clause in their TOS saying "by using Skype(TM)(R)(LMFAO) you agree to blah blah blah..." Again, who cares about the BS agreement? The main thing here is that if true, in exchange for using their service, they require access to an undisclosed amount of your decidedly non-infinite badwidth. That's kinda wonky.

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

13. 

    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2010 @ 5:49am

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Well, *bandwidth, but I guess depending on your provider, "Badwidth" would be appropriate too...

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

14. 

    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2010 @ 5:50am

    
    

    Re: Re:

    There is also cross-talk, where you hear someone else's conversation.

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

15. 

    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2010 @ 9:26am

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    it doesnt matter you cannot consent to resell your bandwidth on a residential internet installation.

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

16. 

    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2010 @ 10:17am

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Damnit TAM, why'd you have to go and screw it up? Nobody should care if some words on paper don't match up quite right. The issue here is that Skype is doing something kind of shady by using you for their traffic. The terms on the agreement can be changed to fit whatever. A business that acts against their customers' interest (Skype) is what was interesting about this. You had me agreeing with you on this one point, and now you come back in and say "lol u broke teh law get to the back to the bus 'the parks'".

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

17. 

    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2010 @ 10:25am

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    it is the doubly whammy. skype makes you agree to something you cant agree with, buries the idea deep in their terms, and then effectively resells you bandwidth to other people who may pay for service. you cant resell your bandwidth, but skype has suckered a bunch of people into doing it really without them knowing. http://chris.pirillo.com/are-you-a-skype-supernode/ the default setting is on and active.

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

18. 

    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2010 @ 10:32am

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "skype makes you agree to something you cant agree with"
    
    Aaaannnd...I'm back on board on this issue. Even if I think that the ToS itself is bogus, Skype should not make me break it as a compuslory prerequisite of using their service. Because even if I don't care if I break my ISP's ToS, my ISP sure as hell will.
    
    That option should be opt-in; especially when ISPs have caps and serious upstream limits.

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

19. 

    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2010 @ 10:53am

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    hence at the end of this all of course skype is for net neutrality because they dont want isps to take action to kill off their source of free unlimited bandwidth. without it skype would like disappear in minutes.

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

20. 

    Derek Kerton (profile), 23 Apr 2010 @ 2:54pm

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "Is this actually how skype works? Of course, screw the customer agreement with a rake, but if they do use your badnwidth for calls other than your own"
    
    They don't carry calls through your connection. What they do is manage the routing using what are called "supernodes". Supernodes are often people running skype on a decent computer, with a good connection, and steady uptime. Anyone can become a supernode, and thus have call handling/management and connection data passed through them. This is P2P.
    
    The actual call is connected directly...um...P2P, but Skype uses the supernodes to help the caller find the callee.

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

21. 

    Derek Kerton (profile), 23 Apr 2010 @ 3:02pm

    
    

    Re: Re:

    See my explanation, above. I didn't use the word "leech", but Skype does potentially use a fair bit of bandwidth even if you are not currently making a call or chat.
    
    One night, I was working on my desktop, and noticed my laptop's cooling fan kept ramping up very high. This happens automatically when the processor is being used. I checked what process was burning cycles on my Centrino. It was Skype. I checked network use, and sure enough Skype was using my PC as a supernode. I consider this a cost of using Skype, so am not peeved. I don't see it as evil. This is how P2P works...you have to pitch in to the network for the network to exist. You can call it "leeching", but it's not a secret. Any geek worth his salt would know that P2P doesn't have central servers to manage traffic, so the work is pushed out to the edge.
    
    However, since I wasn't using it, I did exit Skype on the laptop, which ended the supernode.

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

22. 

    Derek Kerton (profile), 23 Apr 2010 @ 3:05pm

    
    

    Re: You Nailed It, Mike

    Cool. But Carlo wrote this post, and I wrote the prior one it links to.
    
    Who is this Mike?

    [ link to this | view in thread ]