Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathji
In all honesty, they are choosing to enforce them now in order to reduce load on their networks caused by these services, and I really can't fault them as a business for refusing to subsidize the real cost of the services. I would much rather the pay if you go over compared to the cut you off the instant you go over model as has been the only option in the past, albeit done very, very rarely.
|
Absolutely untrue. If the issue is an issue of load/capacity then charging for caps does NOTHING to alleviate capacity shortages. Throttling is only effective for capacity, a practice they are well versed in using.
They have never proven that there are significant capacity issues. They have never revealed any network data showing that caps help them technically. They are charging overages at hundreds if not thousands of times the marginal cost of provding that extra GB of downstream bandwidth.
This is clearly anti-competive monopolist practices. I can't believe you would defending it.
If you really want UBB then sure, lets go there. Lets pay for each and every bit that you download at some standardized rate. So Grandma and Grandpa emailing their kids will pay $5 a month and Mr. Netflix pays $40 a month. Treat bits like utilities treat kWh. That's real UBB not this crap that these companies are ramming down our throats.