Searching \ for '[OT] Comcast, and my blood pressure..' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=comcast+blood+pressure
Search entire site for: 'Comcast, and my blood pressure..'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] Comcast, and my blood pressure..'
2006\08\30@182113 by David VanHorn

picon face
Comcast came out today to fix their problem that had my phones showing
"disconnected number" for two days.

In the process, their guy picked up my twisted pair cable that runs between
the two houses, and cut it into multiple pieces, and then went inside and
threatened my wife.

Now I completely understand that they don't want me sharing the cable signal
over radio-shack rg-59 with the neighborhood, but obviously twisted pair
ethernet does not have any similar problems.

I'm really pissed at this vandalism of my equipment, and the way he treated
my wife.
I was here, but in the office, and apparently he didn't feel like dealing
with me.

Comcast is telling me that they won't allow me to run "a wire" between the
two houses.
I wonder what they will do when I co\mplete my tower installation and have
multiple runs of LMR-400 and LDF4-50 between the two houses, as well as
control cables, alarm, etc ?  :)

In the meantime, I need something wireless that is reliable, and will couple
the lan on one side to the lan on the other side, over a distance of roughly
10'

I could run wifi on the individual computers, but relative to my gigabit
lan, it's slower than snail snot in january.
Any ideas?  I have a pair of Belkin wifi routers, and other common wifi bits
and pieces, but I've never tried to get them to work in this manner.



--
Feel the power of the dark side!  Atmel AVR

2006\08\30@185104 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
David VanHorn wrote:
{Quote hidden}

IR emitter/receiver pairs? They are not visible normally. For just 10'
they don't even need to be modulated.
I have seen T1 chips mux at 100M speeds.

Otherwise, why not just bury the wires? They can't track down
everything, can they? Its not illegal to run
wires between buildings on your own property. What are they thinking?

--Bob
> I could run wifi on the individual computers, but relative to my gigabit
> lan, it's slower than snail snot in january.
> Any ideas?  I have a pair of Belkin wifi routers, and other common wifi bits
> and pieces, but I've never tried to get them to work in this manner.
>
>
>
>  

2006\08\30@190506 by Philip Pemberton

face picon face
David VanHorn wrote:
> Comcast came out today to fix their problem that had my phones showing
> "disconnected number" for two days.
>
> In the process, their guy picked up my twisted pair cable that runs between
> the two houses, and cut it into multiple pieces, and then went inside and
> threatened my wife.

You have got to be kidding... Holy shit, that's rough. And completely and
utterly illegal on this side of the pond - IIRC it's considered "criminal
damage". Not sure what the latter would be, it's probably covered by one of
the many 'antisocial behaviour' laws.

> I'm really pissed at this vandalism of my equipment, and the way he treated
> my wife.
> I was here, but in the office, and apparently he didn't feel like dealing
> with me.

First rule: most bullies are cowards. He probably thought you'd confront him
about the illegal destruction of your property.

I hope you got the guy's name, or at least a company ID number of some
description.

> Comcast is telling me that they won't allow me to run "a wire" between the
> two houses.

If I were in your position, I'd find the address of the nearest Comcast
office, go down there in person (complete with butchered cable), slam said
cable down on the desk, and DEMAND to speak to someone in a position of
authority. If they don't deal with it to your satisfaction, gather some proof
and call the papers. A bit of negative publicity can work wonders. As can
threatening to cancel your subscription -- if you can get a couple of (dozen)
other folks together to do the same thing, so much the better.

Seriously, I wouldn't let this go...

That said, I'm also not surprised it was a Comcast tech that did it.

> In the meantime, I need something wireless that is reliable, and will couple
> the lan on one side to the lan on the other side, over a distance of roughly
> 10'
>
> I could run wifi on the individual computers, but relative to my gigabit
> lan, it's slower than snail snot in january.
> Any ideas?  I have a pair of Belkin wifi routers, and other common wifi bits
> and pieces, but I've never tried to get them to work in this manner.

A couple of Twibright Ronjas? See <http://ronja.twibright.com/>

You could set up an encrypted ad-hoc WiFi link over the two routers (assuming
they'll work in this fashion). Use SSID cloaking, WPA at max strength, and
whatever else you think is necessary.

If the routers won't do ad-hoc mode, set one as an access point an the other
as a client. Most routers and bridges will support that mode, it's just that
ad-hoc mode tends to be a bit faster. That's mainly because there's no access
point management traffic to deal with, but also because APs will try and keep
some spare bandwidth around 'just in case'. Ad-hoc is pretty much
peer-to-peer, so it only has to allocate bandwidth for the two machines. A
pair of 802.11G (54MBit) routers on different RF channels (one on six and one
on eleven, say) should get you close to 100MBit/sec, but going higher than
that wouldn't be easy without having to deal with channel crosstalk (is that
the right term?).

--
Phil.                         | Kitsune: Acorn RiscPC SA202 64M+6G ViewFinder
spam_OUTphilpemTakeThisOuTspamdsl.pipex.com         | Cheetah: Athlon64 3200+ A8VDeluxeV2 512M+100G
http://www.philpem.me.uk/     | Tiger: Toshiba SatPro4600 Celeron700 256M+40G

2006\08\30@191459 by David VanHorn

picon face
> >
> IR emitter/receiver pairs? They are not visible normally. For just 10'
> they don't even need to be modulated.
> I have seen T1 chips mux at 100M speeds.


Hm. Might work. I'm not a big fan of IR, (irda experience.. ) and I don't
need another development project.

Otherwise, why not just bury the wires? They can't track down
> everything, can they? Its not illegal to run
> wires between buildings on your own property. What are they thinking?


It's two street addresses.. They don't claim that it's illegal (unlike their
guy vandalizing my equipment) but that they won't allow it.
If they cut my LDF4-50, that's going to be expensive.
I'm sure that Pasternak will sell me a replacement I can bill to them.
Somewhere in the garage I have some oval waveguide for 10 GHz I could put
up..

I was more looking to trick one wifi router into letting the wireless
connection be the WAN instead of the wire.

2006\08\30@192417 by David VanHorn

picon face
>
> You have got to be kidding... Holy shit, that's rough. And completely and
> utterly illegal on this side of the pond - IIRC it's considered "criminal
> damage". Not sure what the latter would be, it's probably covered by one of
> the many 'antisocial behaviour' laws.


Yes, I'm pissed about the whole thing. The jackass could have just unplugged
it and referred me to someone over there at the office to talk to.


> First rule: most bullies are cowards. He probably thought you'd confront
> him about the illegal destruction of your property.


A very valid concern on his part.

I hope you got the guy's name, or at least a company ID number of some
> description.


No, he didn't even leave a copy of a work order.

>
> If I were in your position, I'd find the address of the nearest Comcast


Been there several times in the last couple days. Staffed by a couple nice
ladies who take payments and sign people up, and that's about it.


>
> You could set up an encrypted ad-hoc WiFi link over the two routers
> (assuming they'll work in this fashion). Use SSID cloaking, WPA at max
> strength, and whatever else you think is necessary.


That's pretty much what I had in mind. Any info or pointers?




> If the routers won't do ad-hoc mode, set one as an access point an the
> other as a client. Most routers and bridges will support that mode, it's
> just that ad-hoc mode tends to be a bit faster.


I've not seen them done like this, but I'd love to.
For that matter, I could run coax between the buildings.
Chop my LMR-214 and see what happens...

2006\08\30@192958 by Marcel Birthelmer

picon face
You can probably set one of them up in "infrastructure" mode - this should
allow exactly what you want. I don't see a reason to bitch and scream at
comcast though.

On 8/30/06, David VanHorn <.....dvanhornKILLspamspam@spam@microbrix.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> -

2006\08\30@194031 by David VanHorn

picon face
On 8/30/06, Marcel Birthelmer <marcelb.listsspamKILLspamgmail.com> wrote:
>
> You can probably set one of them up in "infrastructure" mode - this should
> allow exactly what you want. I don't see a reason to bitch and scream at
> comcast though.



Destruction of private property, threatening my wife?
Grossly unprofessional conduct?

2006\08\30@195530 by Marcel Birthelmer

picon face
Sorry, sorry. I don't see a reason to NOT bitch and scream at comcast
though. And i got infrastructure confused with ad-hoc, apparently.

On 8/30/06, David VanHorn <.....dvanhornKILLspamspam.....microbrix.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> -

2006\08\30@220802 by Mario Mendes

flavicon
face
Interesting that they "wont' allow it", but they can't do a darn thing
about anyone setting up a wireless router and setting up the entire
neighborhood to use that access point in exchange for a six pack during
the weekend BBQs.

Two different street addresses or not, I'd run a PVC pipe under the
ground with the new cable in it.

I'm also pretty sure that not leaving a copy of the work order/receipt
is against company policy if not against some local/state law and they
may be forced to provide you with a copy of such if you request it or
tell them you'll be contacting the attorney general if they don't.  The
suggestion of contacting the papers about their contractor's behavior
will definitely get their attention.

-Mario


{Original Message removed}

2006\08\30@223102 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Wed, 2006-08-30 at 19:24 -0400, David VanHorn wrote:
> >
> > You have got to be kidding... Holy shit, that's rough. And completely and
> > utterly illegal on this side of the pond - IIRC it's considered "criminal
> > damage". Not sure what the latter would be, it's probably covered by one of
> > the many 'antisocial behaviour' laws.
>
>
> Yes, I'm pissed about the whole thing. The jackass could have just unplugged
> it and referred me to someone over there at the office to talk to.

Well you have every right to be pissed. Frankly, I'd simply run another
length of CAT5, dig a shallow trench to hide it if you'd like.

Unfortunately I'm not surprised by comcast. The local cable company in
my area (Rogers) once did something similar to a friend of mine. For the
longest time the cable company has tried to convince people they MUST
pay for each and every outlet in the home, whether it's used or not.
Nobody pays though, and there's nothing the cable company can do about
it. A Rogers technician came over to my friends house to install a cable
modem. He went downstairs, found the end that went to the home office,
and proceeded to cut the end off every other run of cable... My friend
was NOT impressed.

TTYL

2006\08\30@230511 by Richard Prosser

picon face
On 31/08/06, Herbert Graf <mailinglist3spamspam_OUTfarcite.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-08-30 at 19:24 -0400, David VanHorn wrote:

> Well you have every right to be pissed. Frankly, I'd simply run another
> length of CAT5, dig a shallow trench to hide it if you'd like.
>

I'd do much the same but be tempted to plug it in to "something"
before I got them back on site!

On the other hand, could you run the same connection as open wire, say
disguised as an electric fence?

RP

2006\08\30@234551 by Mike Hord

picon face
> In the process, their guy picked up my twisted pair cable that runs between
> the two houses, and cut it into multiple pieces, and then went inside and
> threatened my wife.

Just to clarify, you have a Comcast cable modem and you're sharing the
connection between two adjacent street addresses via a gigabit LAN
that you installed.

You called them in on an unrelated issue and they proceeded to hack up
your network link between the two houses.

Check your local laws.  They may be allowed to do that.  Most
municipalities are so snuggled down in bed with the local cable
company that they can do whatever they please, and most probably have
laws about sharing service connections (for ANY service) between
street addresses, regardless of ownership.

If they AREN'T allowed to do that, press charges, disconnect the cable
and call up your local telco for service.  I'm getting faster DSL than
I ever did cable.

If you DON'T have a cable modem with them, they are CLEARLY violating
the law (IANAL).  Nail 'em to the wall, however you can.

Mike H.

2006\08\31@000715 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face

On Aug 30, 2006, at 4:14 PM, David VanHorn wrote:

> It's two street addresses.. They don't claim that it's illegal (unlike
> their guy vandalizing my equipment) but that they won't
> allow it...)

Comcast has no business cutting up YOUR local area network that
you have connected between your houses.

On the other hand, your usage agreement probably restricts your
"internet service" to a single computer, despite the tendency of
providers to look the other way WRT things like NAT routers and
wireless APs...

BillW

2006\08\31@022150 by Robert Ammerman

picon face
> On the other hand, your usage agreement probably restricts your
> "internet service" to a single computer, despite the tendency of
> providers to look the other way WRT things like NAT routers and
> wireless APs...

Nearly all Cable and DSL providers now explicitly permit multiple machines.
I think the market forced them into it.

Do check your terms of service with Comcast. I am guessing that your
residential service (which I am assuming it is) cannot be legally used by a
business entity (which I understand is in the second house). Still: this
does not give them the right to chop up your cable. On the other hand, to
stay on the  right side of their terms of service you might have to be able
to show them that the business side can't access the Internet.

A configuration like this would do it:

Cable modem in house A
-- ip addrfess between modem and router in house A to please ISP
Router in house A
Router in house B
-- local segment in house A is 192.168.0.x
-- link betwen houses is 192.168.2.x
-- local segment in house B is 192.168.1.x

Router B set up with explicit routing table with the only entry set up being
from 192.168.0.x to go out over the 192.168.2.x link only an entry from
192.168.0.x

Bob Ammerman
RAm Systems

ps: re: using a wireless system to share your Internet connecion with other
households is almost certainly a violation of the terms of service

2006\08\31@040403 by Jake Anderson

flavicon
face
Quick suggestion.
The wire they cut wasn't in fact for internet sharing.
It was so you and the guy next door could kill each other playing quake
3 arena.
Comcast now owes you a new cable and a *very* humble apology.

Alternately
You and your neighbour both being responsible computer geeks use that
cable to store backup data for the other. (off site backup) the wanton
destruction of your property has caused irreparable damage to your
business as it corrupted the backups you depend on just when you
happened to need it.

There are "pre-n" wireless cards out now which are meant to be good for
gbit ;->

David VanHorn wrote:
{Quote hidden}

2006\08\31@054536 by Nate Duehr

face
flavicon
face
David VanHorn wrote:

> In the process, their guy picked up my twisted pair cable that runs between
> the two houses, and cut it into multiple pieces, and then went inside and
> threatened my wife.

Additional thoughts to add to the pile, David.

- Send the main office an invoice for the damage caused.  They certainly
can ask you to disconnect something, but destroying your property isn't
allowable under ANY reasonable law, pretty much anywhere.

- When you write the letter explaining why you're sending them a bill,
copy their INSURANCE company that handles their Bond for their
installers along with a copy of the bill for the damages, and include a
note:

"Just wanted to let you know their installers are doing this and would
like to know what your views are in the matter."

Realistically, will you get paid?  No.  Will you scare the living
bejeezus out of two or three middle managers and cause the insurance
company to give Comcast a friendly phone call asking WTF they are doing?
 Yeah.  Probably.

You just MIGHT even force a new "no damage" policy after the Insurance
company gets through with them.  That would "trickle down" to your
buddy, the installer... who seems to like tearing other people's
property up.

Put the slow, grinding, crushing wheels of Bureaucracy on your side.

If you're serious -- play the game like THEY would.

- Also copy the State Public Utilities Commission.  They may be in bed
with the local government, but SOMEONE regulates Comcast there.

If nothing else, someone there will be interested in filing away
"installer willfully damaged customer equipment" complaints in the file
that will force them to be a common-carrier pipe someday, if they're not
today.

Write your cover letter asking for such -- "If there were competition in
this market and the cable system were run as a common carrier, I would
have NEVER had this much damage to my personal private property, because
they would have talked to me first."

And DEFINITELY copy the local press and District Attorney's office.

You just never know how many people's houses that jackass installer has
already damaged... but someone at the DA's office might.

If it's REAL personal, $20 for a background check on the installer could
yield interesting things to put in the above letters.  But that's
Hatfield vs. McCoy type fightin' then... and could get REAL ugly.  He
knows where you live.

Nate

2006\08\31@094556 by John Ferrell

face picon face
Take a step back a think about the situation.

Your time (and blood pressure) are too valuable to waste on the &derogatory
field tech.

Put things back the way you want them and make a note to restore your
configuration to the minimum needed to show a failure before you call for
service. Some field techs are pretty clever but some are intellectually on
par with a chicken.

You have nothing to gain by blowing off steam at the service provider. Enjoy
the fact that you really did a good job of annoying him!

This is a good place to vent and find some sympathy.

John Ferrell    W8CCW
"My Competition is not my enemy"
http://DixieNC.US

{Original Message removed}

2006\08\31@095609 by David VanHorn

picon face
On 8/31/06, Jake Anderson <@spam@jakeKILLspamspamvapourforge.com> wrote:
>
> Quick suggestion.
> The wire they cut wasn't in fact for internet sharing.
> It was so you and the guy next door could kill each other playing quake
> 3 arena.
> Comcast now owes you a new cable and a *very* humble apology.


Well, I AM the guy next door.  :)
In fact, I run a security camera, alarm status, and a few other things over
that pipe too, but they didn't bother to ask about that before hacking my
nice outdoor rated cable into multiple pieces.

According to yesterday's meeting, they will be back today, in the form of a
"supervisor", with a replacement cable, and we will then discuss my somewhat
unusual living arraingement vs their rulebook, and see if we can come to
some reasonable compromise.
They also told me that they do not permit ANY wire between the two houses.
This point will be discussed, because I absolutely will be running multiple
hardlines and control cables between the houses, since my planned radio
tower will be mounted to the other house.

On the plus side, I now have the wireless connection running, and am getting
roughly 3 megabits throughput, which is very acceptable.

How I did this:  I have a linksys 54G router capable of running DD WRT, so I
downloaded that, and reflashed the router using the DD-WRT file.
I moved that router over to the office, it was originally at home.
I put the older router at home, where their box is, and connected it, and
the one PC there, to the comcast box.

The tricky part is setting up the wireless router at the office in bridge
mode, which is covered in a doc that you'll find under the wikipedia link
for DD-WRT, or at http://dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Wireless_Bridge

The new firmware is MUCH nicer than the linksys version, and among other
things it allows you to up the transmit power from 25mW to something like
250mW.
I do now have a VERY solid link between the houses...   It also allows you
to set up a hotspot, which might be interesting.


Alternately
> You and your neighbour both being responsible computer geeks use that
> cable to store backup data for the other. (off site backup) the wanton
> destruction of your property has caused irreparable damage to your
> business as it corrupted the backups you depend on just when you
> happened to need it.


Actually I do make backups on the home machine, and an offsite CVS server.

2006\08\31@095702 by David VanHorn

picon face
> - Send the main office an invoice for the damage caused.  They certainly
> can ask you to disconnect something, but destroying your property isn't
> allowable under ANY reasonable law, pretty much anywhere.


Oh, I will, though I would bet bucks against ever getting paid on it.


- When you write the letter explaining why you're sending them a bill,
> copy their INSURANCE company that handles their Bond for their
> installers along with a copy of the bill for the damages, and include a
> note:


I like how you think.

2006\08\31@100743 by David VanHorn

picon face
>
> Just to clarify, you have a Comcast cable modem and you're sharing the
> connection between two adjacent street addresses via a gigabit LAN
> that you installed.
>
> You called them in on an unrelated issue and they proceeded to hack up
> your network link between the two houses.


Correct.

We had a fun discussion yesterday, about how I could connect my laptop to
the router via a wire, and if I placed it a foot further to the west, they
would not allow that.. (being across the property line), but that it would
be ok as long as it was wireless.

2006\08\31@101431 by Robert Ammerman

picon face
Excerpts From Verizon's Terms of Service for DSL:

==== FROM TERMS OF SERVICE ====

3.4 The Service is a consumer service and is not designed or intended to be
used by any business or for any business or commercial purpose.

3.6.1 You may not resell the Broadband Service, use it for high volume
purposes, or engage in similar activities that constitute resale (commercial
or non-commercial), as determined solely by Verizon.

3.6.2 You may connect multiple computers/devices within a single home or
office location to your Broadband modem and/or router to access the Service,
but only through a single Broadband account and a single IP address obtained
from Verizon.

3.6.5 You may not use the Broadband Service to host any type of server
personal or commercial in nature.

3.7 Verizon reserves the right to audit connections electronically to
enforce these or any other provision of the Agreement.

And, for a good laugh:

15.2 You agree that the Internet is not owned, operated or managed by, or in
any way affiliated with Verizon ...

==== FROM ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY ====

3. You may NOT use the Service as follows: (a) for any unlawful, improper or
illegal purpose or activity; ....
(g) to post information on newsgroups which is not in the topic area or
charter (e.g. off-topic posting) of the newsgroup*;  ...
(q) to use the Service to operate a server in a manner that interferes with
the network or other users' use of the Service;


*Look out Russell ;-)


As I read through the entire "Terms Of Service" and "Acceptable Use Policy"
I saw an incredible number of occurances of the phrase "at deteremined
solely by Verizon".

Yuck!



Bob Ammerman
RAm Systems


2006\08\31@101513 by David VanHorn

picon face
On 8/31/06, John Ferrell <KILLspamjohnferrellKILLspamspamearthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Take a step back a think about the situation.
>
> Your time (and blood pressure) are too valuable to waste on the
> &derogatory
> field tech.


Good point.. And that has been tempering my mood a bit, but even past the
physical issues, and lousy customer service, there is that bit about him
making threats to my wife.

Put things back the way you want them and make a note to restore your
> configuration to the minimum needed to show a failure before you call for
> service. Some field techs are pretty clever but some are intellectually on
> par with a chicken.


Watch out, James will boot ya for insulting chickens. :)


This is a good place to vent and find some sympathy.

True, and now I have a much better wifi system as well.
Another tool in the bag for later.

2006\08\31@104620 by Harold Hallikainen

face picon face
Comcast and Verizon and similar provider Terms Of Service are rather
restrictive, but are probably fine for a typical consumer. Not being a
typical consumer, I passed on their services and went with Cyberonic. They
offer DSL that is faster than what Verizon offers (over Verizon's wires),
let me share the connection, and let me run servers. I've got about 50G of
stuff on the server now, so it'd cost a bit to host that somewhere else.
Also, I have complete access to the server, making it easy for me to write
scripts, test them, mess with config files, etc. It's my way to learn
Linux!

So, Cyberonic serves me well. Verizon and Comcast missed out on one sale,
but they seem to be pretty popular with my neighbors (by looking at all
the open wireless access points... I can log into my ssh server through
them and see the IP address I came in on).

Harold

--
FCC Rules Updated Daily at http://www.hallikainen.com - Advertising
opportunities available!

2006\08\31@105242 by Gus S Calabrese

face picon face

On 2006-Aug 31, at 08:15hrs AM, David VanHorn wrote:

On 8/31/06, John Ferrell <RemoveMEjohnferrellTakeThisOuTspamearthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Take a step back a think about the situation.
>
> Your time (and blood pressure) are too valuable to waste on the
> &derogatory
> field tech.


Good point.. And that has been tempering my mood a bit, but even past  
the
physical issues, and lousy customer service, there is that bit about him
making threats to my wife.

Put things back the way you want them and make a note to restore your
> configuration to the minimum needed to show a failure before you  
> call for
> service. Some field techs are pretty clever but some are  
> intellectually on
> par with a chicken.


Watch out, James will boot ya for insulting chickens. :)


This is a good place to vent and find some sympathy.
^ Not from me.  This is another case of someone ( the tech )  
overstepping suitable
boundaries and getting away with it.  If you never confront anyone,  
you lose your freedom
one bite at a time.  Evidence seems to suggest you do not care.  
Venting is apparently
safer and better.  AGSC ^


True, and now I have a much better wifi system as well.
Another tool in the bag for later.

2006\08\31@114940 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face

On Aug 30, 2006, at 7:30 PM, Herbert Graf wrote:

> For the longest time the cable company has tried to convince
> people they MUST pay for each and every outlet in the home...

FWIW, we pay for ALL the outlets in our home, and I've been
relatively impressed with the techs who have come out and
re-fiddled with the splitters each time some bandwidth change
has interfered with operation of one outlet or another (five
TVs (some with multiple VCR-like devices, one internet.)

BillW

2006\08\31@120732 by David VanHorn

picon face
>
>
> This is a good place to vent and find some sympathy.
> ^ Not from me.  This is another case of someone ( the tech )
> overstepping suitable
> boundaries and getting away with it.  If you never confront anyone,
> you lose your freedom
> one bite at a time.  Evidence seems to suggest you do not care.
> Venting is apparently
> safer and better.  AGSC ^



Oh make no mistake, I will be confronting them ASAP.
It dosen't sound like the original technician will be back here any time
soon.
He left before i was aware that he was done yesterday, I'm guessing he would
rather pick on my wife than confront me.

2006\08\31@125147 by David VanHorn

picon face
Well, that's resolved now.

An actual intelligent person called, and we talked.

They do not permit their signal to be shared via wire across property lines.

I made it clear to them that there WILL be wires between the properties, and
that future vandalism will be reported to the police, and that reparing
those lines will be expensive.

He also suggested wireless, and told me that they "don't have anywhere to
stand" on wireless sharing.  (!)

He is coming over to deliver the replacement cable, and to personally
apologize to my wife.

The technician will be dealt with internally, but they cannot give details,
due to privacy restrictions.  He seemed genuinely concerned over how things
were handled, and wondered why his guy didn't call him when he discovered
this wire, and ask for instructions.

So, it's negotiated to a win-win. I get to do wireless sharing (I'm talking
on it now!) and they get to enforce their no-wire rule at least as far as is
logically reasonable.

And I discovered the joys of DD-WRT, which I'd recommend to anyone who owns
a compatible router.  :)

2006\08\31@172020 by Robert Ammerman

picon face
>> For the longest time the cable company has tried to convince
>> people they MUST pay for each and every outlet in the home...
>
> FWIW, we pay for ALL the outlets in our home, and I've been
> relatively impressed with the techs who have come out and
> re-fiddled with the splitters each time some bandwidth change
> has interfered with operation of one outlet or another (five
> TVs (some with multiple VCR-like devices, one internet.)

We have Adelphia (well, not any more), and years ago they stopped trying to
charge for multiple outlets.

In fact, when we moved into our new home, I ran a CAT 5, a CAT 3 (telephone)
and RJ59 to each room where they terminate in nice jacks on the wall. When I
called Adelphia to set up my cable service they came out, put their fancy
ends on all my cables in the basement, supplied a splitter (or two?) and
hooked it all up for $0.00!

Maybe I helped the Rigas family drive them bankrupt. :-)

Of course, in the modern world they try to rent you set top boxes and DVRs
instead.

(They still want their pound of flesh!)

Bob Ammerman

>
> BillW
> --

2006\08\31@175640 by Philip Pemberton

face picon face
Posted on behalf of a friend (<spamBeGonepolerinspamBeGonespameclexia.net> if you want to contact them):

I was directed to this thread via IRC.  For full disclosure, I'm a
current comcast employee, though not one who is afraid to acknowledge the
faults of her employer.  There are are a couple points here that I'd like to make.

First of all, the actions of the technician as presented were inappropriate
and far out of scale to the "problem" that he was presented with.
"Threatening" your wife is not acceptiable, and should be followed up on.  Period.

They cannot forbid you from running wires from one property to another. It
does not matter what kind of wire it is.  That being said, you also have to
follow safty codes (which a wire running across the grass is a pretty bad
violation of iirc).  They CAN bring suit against you for theft of service if
they so choose, and try to prove that you were sharing service across
properties. Please note, this DOES include wireless.  The reason they can is
because you signed an agreement with them when you started service.  Part of
that agreement is not sharing service across properties.

Does that give the tech the legal right to chop up a wire he *knew* was in
active participation in theft of service?  I don't know.  IANAL.

Was it the correct action to take?  Hell no.  It escalated the problem way
beyond what needed to happen, and has caused any number of other problems.

I do want you to understand the frustration that probably resulted in this
action being taken.  Before I moved to dispatch/field tech support, I stumbled
across many, Many instances where people were hooked up illegaly.  Most of the
time it was simply them using the existing connection after bashing their way
into the lockbox.  Then others were where they either cut their own fittings
(incorrectly most of the time), or just stripped back the dielectric and
stuck the center conductor into the port.

Most of these illegal hookups also use substandard splitters and internal
wiring, and cause immense ammounts of ingress, damaging forwards and absolutly
trashing reverse.  This kind of noise can totally ruin cable performance
for an entire node, not to mention threatening FCC CLI compliance.  Large
sections of line tech's days are devoted to finding these leaks and handling
them, which can be an extremly time consuming and frustrating process.  Theft
of service becomes intrinsicly linked with frustration and a PITA in their minds.

None of this excuses the actions of the tech.  I'm sorry you have had this
ordeal.  You may want to be careful about persuit legaly, as it does require
that you admit under oath to engaging in theft of service.  **shrugs**

Hope you have fun, and btw, you can do much more interesting things with wifi
and cable modems then simply use it as a link.  I have a friend who is
snarfing a neighbors and binding theirs and his for a much bigger pipe :D

--
Phil.                         | Kitsune: Acorn RiscPC SA202 64M+6G ViewFinder
TakeThisOuTphilpemEraseMEspamspam_OUTdsl.pipex.com         | Cheetah: Athlon64 3200+ A8VDeluxeV2 512M+100G
http://www.philpem.me.uk/     | Tiger: Toshiba SatPro4600 Celeron700 256M+40G

2006\08\31@180836 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face

On Aug 31, 2006, at 2:16 PM, Robert Ammerman wrote:

>> FWIW, we pay for ALL the outlets in our home,

> We have Adelphia, and years ago they stopped trying to
> charge for multiple outlets.
>
I should mention that the comcast charges for the additional TVs
are small and perhaps zero; they were low enough (including
installation) that we made the conscious decision to be "honest"
about the extra outlets rather than string our own cable around
the house.  It was a technical rather than a moral decision...

BillW

2006\08\31@190008 by David VanHorn

picon face
>
>
> First of all, the actions of the technician as presented were
> inappropriate
> and far out of scale to the "problem" that he was presented with.
> "Threatening" your wife is not acceptiable, and should be followed up
> on.  Period.


It was, and I'm satisfied with their resolution.

They cannot forbid you from running wires from one property to another. It
> does not matter what kind of wire it is.  That being said, you also have
> to
> follow safty codes (which a wire running across the grass is a pretty bad
> violation of iirc).  They CAN bring suit against you for theft of service
> if
> they so choose, and try to prove that you were sharing service across
> properties. Please note, this DOES include wireless.


Interestingly, the last three people I talked to, including the supervisor,
told me that wireless is ok.  I'm taking them at their word.

Does that give the tech the legal right to chop up a wire he *knew* was in
> active participation in theft of service?  I don't know.  IANAL.


He didn't know that, he assumed it.  As you know, the router can be
configured NOT to pass that traffic, but he didn't ask, didn't call his
supervisor, which he should, he took it on himself to vandalize my
equipment.


{Quote hidden}

I've done CATV/MATV work, and I'm an extra class ham who owns two repeaters
and maintains three more. About the last guy to run Tandy RG-59 on something
like that.
Besides, I wouldn't want to pollute my own environment.   This was a CAT5
cable though, no risk of that sort of thing.


>None of this excuses the actions of the tech.  I'm sorry you have had this
ordeal.  You may want to be careful about persuit legaly, as it does require
that you admit under oath to engaging in theft of service.  **shrugs**

Depends on the definition.. According to them, I can wire it into my laptop,
and as long as I'm on one side of the property line it's ok, but 1' to the
west and it's a problem, but if I do it with wifi, they don't care..  I'm
sure they'd like to charge me extra per room, person, and eyeball, but
that's not gonna happen.

Hope you have fun, and btw, you can do much more interesting things with
wifi
and cable modems then simply use it as a link.  I have a friend who is
snarfing a neighbors and binding theirs and his for a much bigger pipe :D

VBG  Yeah, all sorts of things going on out there.   I'm just a nice quiet
guy.

2006\08\31@190123 by David VanHorn

picon face
>
> I should mention that the comcast charges for the additional TVs
> are small and perhaps zero; they were low enough (including
> installation) that we made the conscious decision to be "honest"
> about the extra outlets rather than string our own cable around
> the house.  It was a technical rather than a moral decision...


Far better for them to do it, even at a loss, with their quad shield RG-6,
than have everyone using radio shack "radiax" and duct tape.
:)

2006\08\31@215520 by Jinx

face picon face
> Does that give the tech the legal right to chop up a wire he
> *knew* was in active participation in theft of service?  I
> don't know.  IANAL.

The tech probably isn't a lawyer either. Whether Dave was
doing anything illegal is irrelevant. The tech doesn't have the
power to be judge, jury and executioner, and especially not
on Dave's private property. There's a process to go through.
If it's criminal you call the cops, if it's civil you call the office
and they get lawyer on to it. Maybe suspend the service. If
a case is proven against Dave, then the few hours it took to
do that properly is unimportant


'[OT] Comcast, and my blood pressure..'
2006\09\01@003903 by Ling SM
picon face
>>Does that give the tech the legal right to chop up a wire he
>>*knew* was in active participation in theft of service?  I
>>don't know.  IANAL.

2 or 3 suggestions:

1. put up a web page and "slashdot" or "digg" it.
2. zdnet jounalists will die to make it a big PR problem for comcast.
[check up "between the lines" podcast, there are few recordings that
gave huge PR problems to the related fortune 500 companies]

3. sit back while the Pro works and you refocuses on yours.

Cheers, Ling SM

2006\09\01@055040 by Philip Pemberton

face picon face
Ling SM wrote:
>>> Does that give the tech the legal right to chop up a wire he
>>> *knew* was in active participation in theft of service?  I
>>> don't know.  IANAL.
>
> 2 or 3 suggestions:
>
> 1. put up a web page and "slashdot" or "digg" it.

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=195499&cid=16018661

BoingBoing (http://www.boingboing.net) might be interested too...

--
Phil.                         | Kitsune: Acorn RiscPC SA202 64M+6G ViewFinder
RemoveMEphilpemspamTakeThisOuTdsl.pipex.com         | Cheetah: Athlon64 3200+ A8VDeluxeV2 512M+100G
http://www.philpem.me.uk/     | Tiger: Toshiba SatPro4600 Celeron700 256M+40G

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2006 , 2007 only
- Today
- New search...