Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinordi
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.
|
If you honestly think that little Billy will keep downloading his tentacle rape hentai and gundam smashing series' by the hard drive full if his parents suddenly have to pay $50 the first time he goes over by 50GB (a fairly small amount if you are torrenting a lot) then you are really misunderstanding how things work.
People torrent because it is:
a) Free
b) Convenient
If you suddenly don't make it free, do you honestly think that the same amount of people will still be putting 10-20GB HD movie rips up on torrent sites for people to leech off? Think of it this way, would you spend $10-$40 in order for someone else to be able to download a movie for free (or spend if they go over their own bandwidth cap)?
It does make Usenet a more attractive option though, so maybe people will start to use it more. Still has the same problem, except there isn't as big of a bandwidth usage issue that people have to deal with.
Same thing with Netflix. It is a crazy cheap service if you don't need to factor in bandwidth costs. An hour of content on Netflix is about 1GB(?). If you are a moderate user, then your viewing habits won't change much, but if someone is watching 80-100 TV episodes a month and a bunch of movies on top of that, do you would think they would maintain that use when considering the cost they are now paying for it?
All these things mean that either network traffic will go down, or people will start to pay through the nose, which will allow Shaw/Telus etc to upgrade their networks.
Bottom line is you should pay for what you use. At work, I need to pay the real cost of my traffic, because I have a level of service that our company demands. If we don't get that level of service, then our business does not function. Home users should not be any different if they require that same service, but realistically they still are, since all home users are billed the rates they are because they are connected to an over subscribed network infrastructure that allows for such a discount. Most residential users would have a fit if they got the bill I get at work for 100Gb of network traffic.