Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [Wall Street Journal] ISP's to possibly charge per GB (Update: 12/23/2010)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Wall Street Journal] ISP's to possibly charge per GB (Update: 12/23/2010) - Page 24  

post #231 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by allthatisman;11739266 
If it was a $1/GB I would be okay with it. Aside from a little Netflix instant watching, I play TF2 and surf the internetz. I don't know how much bandwidth it takes to play games, but I am sure it's nothing compared with downloading torrents like a lot of people do...

Sadly though, it will not be a reasonable price structure. We will end up getting less for way more. This is GOING to happen. Cable companies as well as the satellite companies are losing more and more customers due to Netflix and, to a lesser extent, torrents. I for one just ditched my Uverse TV for the bottom of the line DiSH plan(for the wife only). The content sucks unless you pay for all the premium channels, and then you are easily looking at a cable tv bill of well over $150, just for TV...

Comcast in particular knows this, and since they practically have a monopoly, they are going to use this as an excuse to ride out their aging network, and hide behind increase demand that calls for increased pricing.

If I were them, I would do it too.

prob why our comcast forces you to get cable tv just to get internet
i just went for the cheapest tv package, I could care less about cable tv
Well It Works...
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-4440 Something Sapphire 280x 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
Hitachi 1TB 7200 RPM WD 2TB Green Mushkin Enhanced 120GB SSD Windows 10 
MonitorPowerCase
23" Samsung 650W XCLIO A380COLOR Fully Black 
  hide details  
Well It Works...
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-4440 Something Sapphire 280x 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
Hitachi 1TB 7200 RPM WD 2TB Green Mushkin Enhanced 120GB SSD Windows 10 
MonitorPowerCase
23" Samsung 650W XCLIO A380COLOR Fully Black 
  hide details  
post #232 of 255
Sky net is going to rise when this happens.
post #233 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirby1;11791389 
Why not have the TV companies start charging us every time we turn on the TV. If I watch TV for 3 hours and someone else only watches it for 1 then I should be charged more, right?

Why not have people who drive more pay higher taxes to cover the cost of building roads?

Because it wouldn't be fair, and it doesnt cost ISPs extra money to provide unrestricted bandwidth to users. The only way this would benifit ISPs (other than by simply allowing them to charge more) is because ISPs wouldnt have to worry so much about ehancing their service because people would be trying to find ways to limit their usage.
Erm, people who drive more DO pay higher taxes to cover the cost of building roads. It's called a gas tax, and most states have one. wink.gif

IMO, this is a completely fair way of doing things. Why is electricity charged based on usage, but something like the internet should not be? Both consume physical resources, both in a very similar manner. Both have a specific amount of service that can be supplied/used, and that amount doesn't change much. A certain gigawattage of electricity is generated 24/7, just as a certain gigabytage of bandwidth is available to use 24/7.

Let's turn this around a bit. What if electricity was the same monthly fee for everyone? Then someone who was poor and trying to save money couldn't turn off a few extra lights to save on next month's electrical bill. Having internet bills based off of usage would give EXACTLY that sort of flexibility for everyone, plus help remind people to conserve the resources.

Everyone in this thread seems to assume that their internet prices would be going up significantly. That might not be the case. Even for an average gamer, you likely wouldn't see an increase. What if you could suddenly get 50/10 internet for an average of $30/month, based on your current usage? Wouldn't that be a better deal than paying $100/month for the same service, even though you aren't even using 1/10th of the total monthly bandwidth that your torrenting neighbor is using?

Really, the people who should worry are those doing things against the TOS of the ISP in the first place - torrenters and people hosting servers out of their own homes.

And I'm right in with that bunch - I have a gameserver that uses over 800GB/month of bandwidth. I imagine my internet bill would be pretty ridiculously high if this idea was implemented. I still support it though - it's only fair, IMO, that people should be charged on a usage basis for services that do not have unlimited resources.
post #234 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by SgtSpike;11797741 
Erm, people who drive more DO pay higher taxes to cover the cost of building roads. It's called a gas tax, and most states have one. wink.gif

IMO, this is a completely fair way of doing things. Why is electricity charged based on usage, but something like the internet should not be?

Because electricity consumes finite resources. Power plants have to pay for the coal they burn, and it can't be reused after you use the energy. Bandwidth, OTOH, is infinitely recyclable. After you are done using it you free it back up for your neighbors to use, at little to no cost for your ISP.
Bob Saget
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K Asrock Extreme4 Gen3 Integrated 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws CL9 1866Mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
60GB OCZ Vertex 2 + 1TB Samsung Spinpoint F3 (2x) Windows 7 x64 Samsung T240 + Acer X223Wbd ABS M1 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonic X-560 HAF X Logitech G5 X-Fi Xtremegamer 
  hide details  
Bob Saget
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K Asrock Extreme4 Gen3 Integrated 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws CL9 1866Mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
60GB OCZ Vertex 2 + 1TB Samsung Spinpoint F3 (2x) Windows 7 x64 Samsung T240 + Acer X223Wbd ABS M1 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonic X-560 HAF X Logitech G5 X-Fi Xtremegamer 
  hide details  
post #235 of 255
I just love how Americans rabidly defend things which are against their own interests. All this nonsense about running out of bandwidth is yet another cleverly disguised scare tactic. This policy would be fair if and only if implemented against people who run servers or use excessive bandwidth from residential connections. US ISP companies, already being run as virtual unregulated monopolies backed by powerful lobbyists, would instead love to have this as the norm to squeeze even more profit out of the consumer without improving service.
post #236 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron_Henderson;11739206 
I go over my 60GB cap every month and I don't even download anything really except the odd game demo or update, and drivers I guess. This is hopefully not going to affect Canada...

already has somewhat.

we get 60gb limit from rogers for our mid tier plan. (being in ontario) i can eventually see how it affects people in the states and uk and they will probably be watch of the bandwidth usage like me. no more steam purchase vs retail, its obvious if its the same price you'll have to buy it at the store to save on bandwidth.
:)
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
CPU Motherboard GPU RAM 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Hard Drive Optical Drive Cooler Operating System 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Monitor Keyboard Electricity Box 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Mouse Pad Ears 
  hide details  
:)
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
CPU Motherboard GPU RAM 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Hard Drive Optical Drive Cooler Operating System 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Monitor Keyboard Electricity Box 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Mouse Pad Ears 
  hide details  
post #237 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsEggrollTime;11800106 
Because electricity consumes finite resources. Power plants have to pay for the coal they burn, and it can't be reused after you use the energy. Bandwidth, OTOH, is infinitely recyclable. After you are done using it you free it back up for your neighbors to use, at little to no cost for your ISP.
Electricity isn't finite when energy comes from the sun, water, etc
Computer
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-4430 Gigabyte GA-H81M-DS2V  MSI GTX 650 Ti Boost Twin Frozr 2 GB ADATA XPG V1.0 DDR3-1600 (2 x 4 GB) 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
OCZ Agility 3 120 GB and Seagate 7200.9 250 GB Cooler Master Hyper 212+ Windows 7 x64 ASUS VS239H-P 23" 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer BlackWidow Antec Earthwatts 500w Cooler Master Elite 341 Microsoft IME 3.0 
  hide details  
Computer
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-4430 Gigabyte GA-H81M-DS2V  MSI GTX 650 Ti Boost Twin Frozr 2 GB ADATA XPG V1.0 DDR3-1600 (2 x 4 GB) 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
OCZ Agility 3 120 GB and Seagate 7200.9 250 GB Cooler Master Hyper 212+ Windows 7 x64 ASUS VS239H-P 23" 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer BlackWidow Antec Earthwatts 500w Cooler Master Elite 341 Microsoft IME 3.0 
  hide details  
post #238 of 255
I reckon the whole thing is not about Internet. It is about control and nothing else. Control your life, control your work, control you via taxes... They do not give a toss about the net, it is about bending the internet to their will so they can control it. They will not bother to control and put a leash on banksters. As we we all know, for the greater good of the American people and the world.frown.gif
post #239 of 255
Thread Starter 
I love how people support their own demise, clueless of profit margins, facts, and unwilling to do a little investigation, so acceptable. Man i would rob you guys for your every penny.

Like i said this would destroy data related business over a private line.

More money in people's pockets = more money to spend at the store, less products on the shelf's, need more stocking, need a stocker , etc.....

If you look in the united states , the highest taxed states are doing the worse.

Texas is doing awesome and has no state income tax.

So the question comes down like it usually does, do you trust more businesses and corporations holding a larger % of national income(unwilling to spend it). Or would you rather have a higher % of national income in the peoples pocket? (willing to spend it)

I would agree if they needed the money to expand and etc....
But when you are heavily involved in marketing and stocks, etc......
you tend to get an eye for seeing the bs right away.
Most people have never ran a business, dont know what
it means to make real money and are clueless of how the real world works.
Edited by finalturismo - 12/28/10 at 5:44am
12 CORE I7 KILLER
(14 items)
 
  
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
6 Core 3.46Ghz XEON X5690 6 Core 3.46Ghz XEON X5690 Precision T7500 Motherboard Asus Strix GTX 980 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
24GB DDR3 ECC (Donated from job) 4X Seagate 15k 600GB SAS RAID 10 OPTICAL DRIVES ARE FOR N00BS Windows 7 64-bit 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
NEC PA271W GRAPHICS MONITOR Precision t7500 1100Watt Psu Dell Precision T7500 Case CM Storm Xornet 
AudioOther
XFI Extreme Music /w 5.1 Logitech CISCO 2800 ROUTER 768MB RAM IOS 15.0 
  hide details  
12 CORE I7 KILLER
(14 items)
 
  
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
6 Core 3.46Ghz XEON X5690 6 Core 3.46Ghz XEON X5690 Precision T7500 Motherboard Asus Strix GTX 980 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
24GB DDR3 ECC (Donated from job) 4X Seagate 15k 600GB SAS RAID 10 OPTICAL DRIVES ARE FOR N00BS Windows 7 64-bit 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
NEC PA271W GRAPHICS MONITOR Precision t7500 1100Watt Psu Dell Precision T7500 Case CM Storm Xornet 
AudioOther
XFI Extreme Music /w 5.1 Logitech CISCO 2800 ROUTER 768MB RAM IOS 15.0 
  hide details  
post #240 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by aldfig0;11801422 
Electricity isn't finite when energy comes from the sun, water, etc

Except it doesn't. The majority of electricity in the US comes from fossil fuels. Your electric bill is based on reality, not some renewable fantasy.

And technically water, wind, and solar are finite. Climates change, as do solar cycles. Powering the grid through renewable energy will never be plausible until we figure out a way to deal with solar variation.
Bob Saget
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K Asrock Extreme4 Gen3 Integrated 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws CL9 1866Mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
60GB OCZ Vertex 2 + 1TB Samsung Spinpoint F3 (2x) Windows 7 x64 Samsung T240 + Acer X223Wbd ABS M1 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonic X-560 HAF X Logitech G5 X-Fi Xtremegamer 
  hide details  
Bob Saget
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K Asrock Extreme4 Gen3 Integrated 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws CL9 1866Mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
60GB OCZ Vertex 2 + 1TB Samsung Spinpoint F3 (2x) Windows 7 x64 Samsung T240 + Acer X223Wbd ABS M1 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonic X-560 HAF X Logitech G5 X-Fi Xtremegamer 
  hide details  
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Technology and Science News
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [Wall Street Journal] ISP's to possibly charge per GB (Update: 12/23/2010)