On Sunday 26 September 2004 07:19 pm, Joey Kelly wrote: > > 256k? They doubled the speed from a dismal 30 kilo-bytes/second to 60 > > kilo-bytes/second. Yes, I just tested it again to verify. > > How are you checking your speed? When we say that our upload cap is 256k, > we mean 256 kiloBITs per second, not kiloBYTEs per second. If you're > showing 30 kiloBYTEs outbound, then you're about right (256 / 8 = 32). >
I'm measuring it with sftp and http. Looks like they are reporting accurately. > > How you get your IP is of absolutely no consequence, after you've gotten > it. No conspiracy involved. In fact, Scott Harney can tell you how pitiful > @HOME's security was (he's probably posted it here already, maybe the > archives have it). Cox's setup is way more secure, trust me. > What does dhcp have to do with security? > > As far as the blocked ports go, that is because Windows machines were > getting owned by wirms, viruses, kiddie scripters and spammers. Grandma has > no need of running a mail or web server (ports 25 and 80, the ones that are > blocked), but so many of the Windows machines out there were blasting the > net due to nimda and friends that the industry as a whole decided to block > these non-essential services. If you're technically able to intelligently > run these services, Cox will sell you a business account without these > ports blocked. > So, because Windows is easy to crack and hard to do useful things with, those usefull things are "non-essential"? What makes browsing the big corporate billboard or spam essential?
