Well when you can start making an exact working copy of your car from your car over and over, you might have to start that exercise program you've been putting off.

The reason is because they have to get the publishers permission to do it, they can't just say "Hey Activision, we're doing a free weekend for CoD:WoW"

Why do you need to "predownload" something before you buy it. If you are going to buy the game after the download finishes, it's the same thing as buying and then downloading it. Unless you are wanting to predownload it and then buy it later when you can afford it. Beyond that one scenario I don't see the value in predownloading it.

Well I would say that is your mistake for buying a retail copy. Steam usually sells the game for cheaper anyway not to mention weekend deals and all that fun stuff. The reason why I've heard is because of KeyGens.

I disagree. The entire point of Steam is not having to worry about physical media and keys, not having to download patches and hope it installs correctly or using another system to find servers. The point is all the tools you need are built and/or automatically done for you. Get a new computer, go to a friends house, need more HDD space, no problem. The games can be downloaded with the latest patches and installed for you in less then an hour or two (depending on connection and such) without having to worry about damaged media and lost keys. So, yeah, you're right. No benefit what so ever.

... Gamers and people would stream media would be paying to. And that's just residential customers. You are forgetting all the businesses who are not ISP but require broadband internet connection. Your commercial lines aren't always being run by Comcast or Timewarner or anything, but they certainly aren't going to use the free service and they also use the most bandwidth. So no, not everyone is going to hop onto the free network. I certainly would not use it, but I'm all for it for people who would be willing to use it.

First all, the people who use the most bandwidth won't be the ones using the free service. They will be the ones paying for their connection. Secondly, I'm willing to bet the majority of people on the free service would not be constantly using their bandwidth like I thought a lot of us /.ers do. I really don't see a huge problem with this.

I have always said I would pay double or triple my current cable bill if I could watch without commercials or dvr/tivo. Many people on the other hand feel the opposite. I myself are willing to pay higher service cost for better quality service, but by allowing the people who aren't in my group to switch over to the free internet and free up current networks, I'm all for it.

It was for people in rural areas where the lines are already setup for other services. Also the people who pay 15/7 wouldn't care about the filters. Also I myself pay 75/m for 16mb connection and a service that I could purchase for 15/month would not meet my needs as I'm sure the same goes for a lot of people on /. This connection would be for the non-technophiles. I'm all for it. Get grandma off my current node so it frees up more of the bandwidth.

Google is top because it's a very quick and robust search engine and has always had the policy of keeping users privacy a one of their top priorities.