Wallstrip's Julie Alexandra talks about the impending struggle for bandwidth freedom as Internet providers consider charging users for heavy Web use. Watch below:
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
This sound familar?
Get Americans "hooked" on something, then drive the price up outta sight.
Don't give them anything really competitive.
Hmmmmm....
The only truly GOOD or DEMOCRATIC, perhaps, REVOLUTIONARY, thing that has come out of this election year (and the GOOD I refer to actually began with Howard Dean's failed bid) is the use of the INTERNET AS A CAMPAIGN TOOL. Candidate websites, along with Youtube and other community sites, have arguably made it possible for people of relatively modest means to get their message out and raise campaign funds. An election bid, once reserved for the very rich and well-connected, is now far more accessible to the average citizen.
Could it be a coincidence that corp. america is now considering charging us for premium (i.e. high speed which equals greater connectivity) internet home access based on "usage time" rather than the flat rates we've been paying?
Remember, dial-up internet access is slow. Video and audio downloads take forever and connections are frequently lost. Is this proposed "usage based" billing system a way of restricting free speech, freedom of assembly, access to political information, or at least limiting it to those who are wealthier? And what effect would that have on the REVOLUTION that is ONLINE CAMPAIGNING?
Is the average Joe gonna use his expensive usage time researching a politicians stance (which he might do given unlimited usage time) or downloading porn, instead? Is the average Jane gonna choose updating her myspace page or dating site rather than reading that news article on the prospect of War in a far off land? Kinda makes you wonder don't it.
Interesting.
This has NOTHING to do with ANYTHING except greed.
GREED.
All they want is your money, taken in the largest possible amounts. They don't give a damn about your rights, your opinions or your life.
AOL started the flatrate problem... back in 1995 that was a novel trick but the suits didn't care about those nerd things. Now that the nation depends on the internet, and the obvious possibility of something for nothing has become the driving force of corporate america, you are nothing but a lamb led to slaughter.
How the hell can the suits refuse to take you for a ride? Did you think they were concerned about anything but themselves?
You're right.
I worked for movie and tv industry suits.
Total thieves. Talk liberal sh*t all day, then stab you in the back like any conservative.
You are 100% dead on!!!
Return to dial-up and flip them off. It's the message, now matter what the baud rate.
Watch what THIS will do to the economy.
When the internet was just a bunch of isolated online providers I ran up a $200 CompuServe bill because of their per minute charges. They abandoned those because it made people use the service less and even drop it, or go to another provider.
They might try this for a while, but eventually it won't stick because someone else will come along with an unlimited plan in every market or their customers will find some other alternative. The big fight will be in blocking more mergers to preserve that competition and requiring net nuetrality so my CONTENT PROVIDER can get their signal across my IP.
Price competition will keep prices from getting too high...and if they get too high for a certain person, they will cut back on their use.
Gas prices, anyone? At least there isn't an OBPC (Organization of Broadband Producing Companies).
Price competition--as long as appropriate agencies block new mergers and make an environment that allows new companies to get into the mix. If we end up with only 2 IP companies that don't always overlap, we'll have no competition.
Don't be so sure of that!!! If you read up on the entire Enron debacle you will see that they were already organizing a grab and consolidate plan so they could attach a futures type structure to bandwidth usage. This model will never work. As things tighten up and net access becomes a privilege, with budgetary concerns maybe people will go outside and just ... you know ... talk TO each other!!!!
Don't be ridiculous
Price competition? At least OPEC is a cartel with multiple independent members. The broadband market is a legalized monopoly in most markets. Even in cities there are usually at most two choices. Lucky me, my two and only broadband choices are ATT (who wants to do this) and Time Warner (who already is doing this). If Comcast and Time Warner are both doing this for instance there will be very few areas where a cable modem that doesn't have this problem will be available. If they are going to start charging huge money then they need to lose their monopoly privileges. To be honest I have no idea why broadband lines are not considered a public good like roads.
I spent my 40GBs in less then a week without doing a single illegal thing. I rented 4 high definition movies on my apple TV (5+GBs each), downloaded 10 video podcasts (ever since the NBC nightly news and Countdown have become free podcasts I've gotten them every day) and streamed a number of TV shows in HD on Hulu. The idea that anyone using 40GBs is a lawbreaker is just stupid given how much VOD there is all over the internet now. We're already paying as much (sometimes more) for service that is less then a 10th as good as many Asian and European countries have, now we're going to be further limited from the new internet because of Time Warner and ATTs monopolistic greed? No thanks.
You're right about the legalized monopoly. When I got cable and internet a couple years ago, my only "option" was Comcast, or none at all. That was on a military base, so I think it's safe bet that someone in government got rich off that monopoly..
Broadband is not public goods because broadband is not provided with tax dollars (which are theft). I don't believe Comcast, AT&T, Time Warner, or anyone else owes me broadband, and I AM willing to pay for such a service. The problem isn't competition, it's government organized and sanctioned monopolies.
In a TRULY FREE MARKET, which we do not have, a monopoly is unsustainable.
You SHOULD pay extra for that kind of activity. Stop treating the internet like your own personal TV station. That's not what it's meant for. You're ruining it for the rest of us.
They are in the process of selling the roads to private industry. Why don't the airwaves belong to us ? Who gave them to the government? The government TOOK them and gave them to Clear Channel, Rupert Murdock etc for a price. The same will happen with broadband.
The government takes what belongs to YOU and sells it to the highest bidder so that you have to buy what already belongs to you. WHY? Because people keep electing the same criminals over and over again.
The best part was when she used the term "peak broadband".
This would appear to be a form of censoring. After all, many of us get our news from the internet, as well as our entertainment. If we know it will cost us, and we can ill afford what we have now, we will be unable to access the internet. If we can't afford to get the honest news, we will have to rely on the less than forthcoming media and will therefore succumb to the spin. Without sites such as this, we will all be led to believe that Bush is compassionate and intelligent, Cheney is a pussycat and Congress has our best interests in mind at all times.
Do you actually believe that we don't have censorship now? Have you seen TV news lately?
As an aside I couldn't help but wonder how much money passed hands getting that immunity clause through for the telcoms.Th
The ACLU is going to tell us. God bless the ACLU.
The way I see it is they want to quit investing in infrastructure and get paid more for equipment that has already been paid for.I can't blame them for trying and the way they'll do it is to be reasonable
e-Mail charges on the horizon. The Post Office has been trying to get their little grubbies into e-Mail for years. If this ever happens, I expect we'll start seeing a fee for each e-Mail sent.
PART TWO
THINK ABOUT
ADVERTISIN
YOU TUBE>.. LOL C'YA! it is cute but who will PAY for it?
SPAM will have to be a Felony. as it wastes TONS of Bandwidth every day.
GAMERS Since online gamers are who push the tech advances (fact) they only the RICH will be able to play games online.
PLEASE NOTE THIS!!
We are NOT the most advanced country in the world when it comes to technology for the consumer BY FAR and have never been. EXAMPLE
You know this HOT new movement to HD TV we are currently trying to make? Well I saw it back in the 80's IN MY HOTEL ROOM not in some fancy place in Dubai but in SANTIAGO CHILE!!!
Our system in the U.S. is to keep the Rich Rich and NOT to make things best for US. You will use up all of the outdated crap other countries have passed on until it is all gone because it costs THEM less to SELL it to you.
Any Traveler will tell you the same.. I am Embarrassed to take out my cell phone in most countries, even the KIDS look at me like I am holding the Brick phone of the 80's and I have the latest gear available in the U.S.
This is absolutely true and correct!!
PART ONE
Remember when ATT and its cohorts tried to make a local call into a Long Distance call by adding area codes within the same city? We had to pat "locallong distance" to call a Block away! Back when they had a Monopoly? Remember .25 cents a minute to call coast to coast via landlines? These people want their Billions Back and they will not stop until they get them.
Cell Phones ended the land line Monopoly and we could call long distance again. We also had the internet..
No kidding. They're terrified of good, affordable cell service and free VOIP like Skype. Everything else the big telecoms say is a lie, a smokescreen, or spin.
The best protection for consumers is competition. We should all work for and support companies coming into existing territories of their competitors and against politicians making exclusive deals as they have in many communities. Of course the way this works is the community taxes its citizens through fees, surcharges, license charges and franchise fees supposedly paid by the internet provider and the internet provider gains a local monopoly. While the consumers pay and pay in high prices due to the monopoly and indirect taxes and fees.
They make the claim that 95% of users fall well below what they consider heavy usage. If it's 5% of users then why change everyones rates? My pay as you go cellphone has two rate plans. .10 a minute but a one dollar fee for the day you use them, or .25 a minute with no connection fee. They claim the best is the .10 plan but I would average .75 a day more for that plan. Best for who is the real question.
Life existed before PC's and the internet. And it is still possible for human beings and the world to exist with out it.
Ok gramps
no it is not!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
; ) maybe his handle is really his NUMBER! He could be doing tripleLife and has been in since the 60's so give him a break!
I think we don't need any of it then. Why did we progress from the stone age, heck they lived then too, so let us become like our ancestors again. What kind of reasoning is this? Some people
don't mind for the government to snoop on the phone either ....
Yeah, to hell with those small businesspeople whose sharply increased costs will make it harder for them to stay in business.
And then, without net neutrality, fewer and fewer customers to actually even get to their site, because it loads so slow, due to the small businesspeople's inability to afford the bribes the telecoms want to charge them in order to use their elite "faster" channel.
Yeah, screw them. They're just whining techno-babies who need to get a life. You tell 'em, tiger!
The only way to stop this from happening is to cancel your service as soon as they try to bill you for bandwidth. Let them know why your leaving. That's exactly what I will do. I'll switch to a provider that doesn't. If everyone did this the whole idea of it would disappear very fast. As a young newlywed I had a rotary dial phone. If someone tried to call when I wasn't home all they, and the cockroaches, heard was continuous ringing. Life was good!
I have no idea how you're going to manage that if you're like most people. Usually there are two choices in any area, a single cable provider and a single DSL provider since both are often given legal government monopolies. This means that you can tell Time Warner to go....you know, but then what? You join up with ATT and they do the same thing to you? Until this system of monopolies is broken down and networks are made a truly public good we'll have to settle for both inferior third world service (the internet is dozens of times faster in many Asian and European countries then it is in even large markets here) and ever increasing prices.
Loading comments…
| 07/17/08 05:12 AM