On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 05:48:25AM -0500, Tom Allison wrote: | dman wrote: | | >On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 12:49:42AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: | >| also sprach nate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.21.2352 +0100]: | >| > but i too wouldn't mind a pay download service ..seems | >| > in recent months most of the fast U.S. debian mirrors | >| > have gone away. or maybe its just my providers.. usually | >| > 10-20kb/s once or twice i can get a site that can give | >| > 100+kb/s. | > | >It's not just you. Over here in Rochester; FrontierNet (dsl) at home | >and RoadRunner at work. | | This is a really bad idea.
I was just letting nate know that the problem isn't on his end (or that the services over here have duplicated the problem ;-)). | You implicate that there is a guarantee of | available bandwidth if I pay a certain amount of money. Of course there is ... | My Cable-Modem ISP is my biggest bottleneck and they won't talk about | it. How much is their talk worth to you? I bet if you waved $10K under their nose, they'd start talking. The real issue is not whether or not money can make a difference, but how much money will make a difference. Almost every{thing|one} can be bought for a price. | Do I get my money back if I try to download during a CableModem | slowest time? You don't get your money back, but if you give enough in the first place you'll get a higher priority (politically). | Cablemodems basically suck because you don't have consistent speed | and you can't get anything running for yourself. No worse than any other medium. It's all shared somewhere along the line; and my dsl hasn't always been consistent either. -D -- A)bort, R)etry, B)ang it with a large hammer