I work for a large ISP, and for residential accounts, we don't particularly care if you're a "bandwidth hog," as long as you're not affecting other customers around you. If we see that one person is causing significant congestion, then that's a problem that we'll address (but only when it happens repeatedly and consistently). Most of the time the customer is either unaware, has an open router, or has a virus/worm/trojan.

Companies overselling is a very popular and acceptable thing too (for them). Airlines, hotels, and movie theaters often do this expecting no-shows and cancels. But i expect the percentage oversold is based on historical facts for that particular day the previous year. ISPs might have been able to oversell so much in the past but as more content moves from tv/phone/radio to the internet, the typical usage might be outstripping the previous years usage numbers. Just my thoughts..

Another point that people seem to be missing is that movies are intrinsically momre expensive and difficult to produce than music. While you might have an independent music act that is just as good as Britney Spears, we are a LONG way from independent movies that match the production quality/acting/special effects/etc. of Star Wars, 2012, etc. [Look at the credits for any movie to have at least an _idea_ of how much work goes into it].

For this reason, the democratization that threatens "big music" is very unlikely to threaten Hollywood. (The occasional independent movie that becomes a hit is unlikely to change the general trend).

No no - I was actually suggesting the opposite. Basically that the reason the researchers were moving their hands was because we are not used to moving objects with only our minds. Therefore, the physical motion was the "priming" that was needed in conjunction with the mental movement. Once we are more practiced at "using the force" to move things, the hand movements shouldn't be necessary. And it's at this point that a person in a vegetative state could use the technology. I wonder how difficult it would be to train someone in that state to use the apparatus?

Maybe they aren't overselling their bandwidth. Maybe they are selling their bandwidth fine and someone is going past what the ISP said they would offer to them and, as such, they limit the user.

This upsets the customer. I know it sounds completely back-asswards, but most people would rather be blocked for an hour, told why they are blocked, and told to change, and then resume their normal speeds, as opposed to NOT getting a warning, having speeds decrease what they are paying for, and are left alone and angry to the point where they will go somewhere else.

I have used both Photoshop and Gimp, and I curse at both. I rarely need to use photo editing software, but when I do I want to get the task done quickly with an intuitive interface. Neither Photoshop nor Gimp fits this bill.

You mean the modem macid they already have? As I understand it, all they're doing is putting your macid on a list so your browser isn't redirected.

The other side of the coin is the customer experience. Think about the average internet user. They cannot tell the difference between a 404 error and a 504 error.

People often unknowingly mistype URLs and automatically believe that their internet is broken and they need to call their ISP in order to get it working again. My personal experience working tech support for a large ISP is that mistyping domain names is a huge call driver, and this service is meant to address that.

That's the other side, now flame on.

I wear clothes to protect my skin from sunburn. Buying a case for my phone isn't much of a stretch beyond that.

Playing devil's advocate here...

Both Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. constantly broke the law with their peaceful protests.

By your logic, we shouldn't admire or revere Gandhi or MLK because they broke the law hundreds of times.

I disagree.

I was pointing out what their reasons were based on their manifesto. Nothing more.

Respectfully, you're missing the point. Their point is that full disclosure helps the exploiters exploit more. Anti-sec is pointing out that there are two main ways that full disclosure is a bad thing:

1. Full disclosure allows cut and paste script kiddies to wreak continual havoc with detailed and fully documented exploits from the whitehat security industry.

2. The whitehat security industry (antivirus, firewalls, auditing services) profit hugely from full disclosure by scare tactics.

They are pushing for change in the whitehat security industry itself, so that script kiddies and security companies stop exploiting the consequences of full disclosure.

"Comcast Digital Voice uses Internet Protocol and not the Internet. Comcast Digital
Voice calls travel on our private, managed network -- not over the public Internet. That makes
it superior to other 'Best Effort' services delivering phone traffic over the public Internet."

Source (emphasis mine): http://www.comcast.com/MediaLibrary/1/1/About/PressRoom/Documents/ProductsAndServices/digital_voice.pdf