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
If this isn't the best argument ever against the sham that is known as capitalism, I don't know wh at the hell is. Oh wait, the oil prices might have a competing interest in that. ;)
Socialism isn't sounding too bad about now..... "To each, according to their needs.... from each, according to their abilities". ;)
Anyone ever play the banana republic leadership simulation game called Tropico?? It's a blast. Capitalist waste no time throwing you out of office if you don't make them happy, also USA likes to send gunboats down to "encourage" capitalism. ;) Pretty amusing game, very eye opening as well. I was addicted to it for a couple months during all that time i was without the internet. ;)
Most economists would agree that this makes sense. Charging nothing for a finiite resource makes little sense. The thing is many companies overbuilt fiber in the first internet boom so bandwidth was essentially an unlimited resource. Your cell phone company doesn't give you unlimited minutes does it?
You are also right that it will cause companies to be more cautious about designing bandwidth. It has been a while since I designed pages thinking 'We have to maks sure this will still download in a reasonable time on a 56K modem". but the internet did work and we got stuff done using it.
"Charging nothing for a finiite resource " ??
I pay fifty dollars a month. Where does this "charge nothing" come from?
I pay $60 a month here Florida, do tell where they are giving it away for free! Apparently joeblough and I must be doing something wrong here since we have to pay a bill each month.
Some cellphone companies (e.g. MetroPCS) do charge a flat rate for unlimited minutes...
The day after metering comes to my provider, I jack bandwidth from all those idiots with unsecured wi-fi. And I won't be the only one doing it. Hope you guys know how to secure your network.
If they don't know how to secure their wireless network, they deserve to be jacked.
They DESERVE it? Criminals deserve jail, but I don't deserve to pay for it. Therefore, kill all criminals.
no such thing as a secure network. Anyone with any sense and time can crack any network. Simple cracks out already to get the pass for wireless networks.
Advertisers will not be amused by all the ingenious ways that will proliferate to block them from reaching us. Those big flash ads will come to an end. YouTube? Buh-bye. Hula? Sorry, hardly knew ya.
The backlash the would ensue might finally get some progress on breaking up these monopolies. I'm not about to pay for spam. Or advertising.
But that's what it's really all about, they get to use up the bandwidth YOU are paying for by sending you unsolicited crap (which, if you had a choice you would block, but you will NEVER be given that choice). Then they charge you an arm and a leg to access any information that is not approved by the party, uuh state, uh big Brother, uhh them. That way we never get to hear or see anything that might make us commit thought crimes.
It's really for our own good you see. You should be shopping, not thinking after all.
This is what conservatives call getting government off our backs.
she purdy
OR they could do as Europe and Japan does and actually spend some of their profits to improve their networks. This is a discrace and truly represents the proverbial "slippery slope." If this is allowed to happen 10 years from now you will only be online 15 minutes per day, just like back in the mid 1990's and your internet bill will still continue to go up.
They could also ban file sharing software and peer to peer or require them to use a metered connection.
"OR they could do as Europe and Japan does and actually spend some of their profits to improve their networks."
Never happen, it would cut into their profits. This is a nation of capitalism on steroids.
maybe they are trying to move attention away from the telecom bill that was just passed? Kinda like the boobie flash (during super-bowl halftime show) Janet Jackson did to take some heat off of her brother who at the time was in very deep do-do.
By the way. Where did Mikey move to? Was it the same country that just bought the big building?
Very bad for business growth.
At this time, we want to encourage baby businesses to grow and contribute to our economy. That's where new jobs, the future is created.
This would certainly hamper small businesses, which rely heavily on internet use.
I remember when AOL was the only game in town. They got greedy and look at them now. I remember getting a $300+ bill from them one month and got a take-it-or-leave-it response from their customer service when I called to complain. I jumped ship quickly as soon as unlimited service at an affordable price was made available from another smaller local provider.
As the old saying goes, "those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it"...
I remember when AOL charged by the minute! It was horrid!
God, please don't let them do this!
Google does not want this to happen because it would limit the amount that people use youtube. Videos use up a tons more bandwidth than html. Look what happens, the day we give the telecoms immunity they try to find another way to F*%& us.
Its called collusion: it is a monopolistic practice and it is illegal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collusion
If I paid for bandwidth, I would not visit HuffPo. The layout is colorful, but wastes bandwidth on pictures everywhere, plus frequently more than one headline links to the same article. I'd use an RSS feed and suppress the advertisements.
Ha! I was just thinking the same thing.
Overall, if this goes through, watch for browsers to emerge that kill all content except bare text and tiny thumbnails.
If you want a massive speed boost, can turn off java and reject all cookies. If they don't know you are there via a cookie, lol, they can't open a pop-up window full of ads. ;) I run with most, but not all, cookies restricted as it is, and that kills most popups even without running a blocker.
Course, could use that original web browser, I think it was called Mosaic?? If it's still available for download, it's an interesting thing to use, as it doesn't come with java, and most of the bloatware associated with the internet these days. Besides, often java is the #1 security threat out there.
This would be the death of a lot of websites. Practically every websites worth visiting burns up a lot of bandwith with pictures, audio and video. If this happenes we'll be back to the early days of the internet with text only on a white background for sites that are not backed up by a big corporation. CNN, FOX, The New York Times, etc! The real problem here is that the web is too democratic and that scares the pwers that be so they have come up with a scheme to slap some economic controls on it. This is a coporate facist country through and through!
This is what happens all over the world. Unlimited internet is actually pretty rare. I go through my 2 gig in prime time and 10 gig in the early hours almost every month and get shaped awfully.
If we could just get OUR Congress to Nationalize all utilities, we'd all have a couple more bucks.......or at least our hard earned money wouldn't go to the wall street crowd.
After all why are we to think of government as the advocate for capitalism......that is not their job.
Loading comments…
| 07/17/08 05:12 AM