dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2010-02-10 11:01:09: The network neutrality debate really started up in the States in 2005, with then AT&T CEO Ed Whitacre, envious of Google ad revenue, oddly declaring that Google should pay a surcharge to AT&T, well, just because. ..

page: 1 · 2 · 3 · next

Z80A
Premium Member
join:2009-11-23

4 edits

2 recommendations

Z80A

Premium Member

Ah, a free ISP

Wow, an ISP that doesn't charge subscribers for their connection. That must be the case since this ISP is claiming Google is getting a "free ride" to their subscribers. Certainly they couldn't make such and idiotic claim if subscribers actually paid for their internet service.

Notice to the leeching double dipping ISPs...without compelling content like that from google, you wouldn't have any HSI subscribers. Without the streaming video and such, everyone would be free to go back to dial-up for $8.

And to Ed Whitacre, I think Chevy and the rest of Government Motors is getting a free ride on the government's roads. Time to pay up for every mile GM owners drive (since he also loved the consumption based model). Using Ed logic it doesn't matter that Chevy's "subscribers" already pay road taxes (license fees, excise taxes etc); Chevy is getting a free ride.

Meanwhile Google should refuse to pay any bounty and BLOCK access from any ISP that actively traffic shapes their content. The ISP would crumble soon enough.

cpsycho
join:2008-06-03
Treadeu Land

cpsycho

Member

...

Some days I wonder how companies can be so dumb and greedy at the same time.

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Google Uses 21 Times More Bandwidth than it Pays For

Here is someone who makes the case that Google doesn't pay it's fair share of internet costs. NOT that it pays NOTHING, but that it gets a huge discount and transfers costs to ISPs.

»precursorblog.com/conten ··· ch-study

Full study(27 pages): »www.netcompetition.org/s ··· sts2.pdf
o2cool8
join:2002-04-19
Cary, NC

o2cool8

Member

So, where does it end?

So, where does it end? They should charge twitter, microsoft, yahoo, facebook? Why only google?

Gbcue
Premium Member
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA

Gbcue

Premium Member

Google Should Block

Google and Yahoo, YT, etc. should block their content from Telefonica, just because.

Then see what happens.

adisor19
join:2004-10-11

2 edits

adisor19 to FFH5

Member

to FFH5

Re: Google Uses 21 Times More Bandwidth than it Pays For

said by FFH5:

Here is someone who makes the case that Google doesn't pay it's fair share of internet costs. NOT that it pays NOTHING, but that it gets a huge discount and transfers costs to ISPs.

»precursorblog.com/conten ··· ch-study

Full study(27 pages): »www.netcompetition.org/s ··· sts2.pdf
EDIT : ok so Karl apparently updated the original post after you made your post so please excuse my poking fun of you.

Adi

EDIT no.2 : So apparently Karl did NOT edit the original post after yours so my apologies are no longer valid.

Adi
ISurfTooMuch
join:2007-04-23
Tuscaloosa, AL

1 recommendation

ISurfTooMuch

Member

They're bluffing, and Google knows it

These guys are bluffing, plain and simple, and Google knows it. What are they going to do if Google refuses to pay? Block them or degrade their service? Oh, that will go over well with their customers. It'll be a public relations nightmare that will go on and on. First, they'll get slammed for simply blocking or degrading Google, which they'll have to explain. They'll explain that Google isn't paying its "fair share" for bandwidth, at which point Google will fire back that it pays quite a lot for bandwidth, thank you very much, and it may also publicly ask why sites such as Bing, Yahoo, MSNBC, Facebook, MySpace, etc. aren't also being blocked. Are they all paying? If not, why is Google being singled out? And if they should pay, then shouldn't subs be either getting discounted service or maybe even free service? Then the ISP will have to try to explain their rationale for trying to double-dip by charging both customers and Web sites, and we know that the more they talk about this, the sillier and greedier they look, and we also know this isn't a discussion they want to have out in the open.

So who wants to be the first ISP to try this stunt?

spewak
R.I.P Dadkins
Premium Member
join:2001-08-07
Elk Grove, CA
·Consolidated Com..

spewak

Premium Member

Move over Scotty boy

There's a new Sheriff in town, and it's me!
I can write a 30 page bullshit report full of inanities and made up facts to support the telcos. You dumbass, are out of a job! Pack up your typewriter and get out of town.

mod_wastrel
anonome
join:2008-03-28

mod_wastrel

Member

Well,

I guess they need to find some way to pay for fixing all of those potholes caused by Google's heavy traffic on the Information Super-highway... oh, my!

PToN
Premium Member
join:2001-10-04
Houston, TX

PToN to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5

Re: Google Uses 21 Times More Bandwidth than it Pays For

I guess you didnt read one of the user's comment:
quote:
Economy of scale
Submitted by Paul Clieu on Mon, 2009-01-12 07:40.

Your estimates suggest that Google is paying 5% of the average cost for bandwidth. Considering their volume, this is not unreasonable at all.

It is a well accepted rule of thumb that as you double unit volume, unit costs tend to drop by 25%.

Assume the amount of bandwidth used by Google is about 10**8 (100 million) times that of a ordinary individual internet consumer. Log2(100 million) is 26.58. 0.75**26.58 is 0.000478. Assume the average consumer pays $600 per year, then when you do the maths, it works out that Google should be paying about $29M not the $318M allegedly paid. Your estimates should factor in the rather large economy of scale that Google should enjoy.



djrobx
Premium Member
join:2000-05-31
Reno, NV

djrobx

Premium Member

Nice article photo!

This ISP can try disabling Google access for a while and see where it gets them. While I'm not sure about neutrality rules in the Spanish countries Telefonica operates, but I'm sure customer backlash would solve things pretty fast.

AVD
Respice, Adspice, Prospice
Premium Member
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ

AVD to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5

Re: Google Uses 21 Times More Bandwidth than it Pays For

said by FFH5:

Here is someone who makes the case that Google doesn't pay it's fair share of internet costs. NOT that it pays NOTHING, but that it gets a huge discount and transfers costs to ISPs.

»precursorblog.com/conten ··· ch-study

Full study(27 pages): »www.netcompetition.org/s ··· sts2.pdf
-1

Mole_Y
@verizon.net

Mole_Y

Anon

There is no free ride....

and never has been a free ride.
The websites like google or fill in the blank all pay for hosting of some kind or another. T3's, T1's or any other kind of pipeline doesn't come cheap to any website.

Bottom line, consumers and websites alike pay for connectivity to the world wide web.

maartena
Elmo
Premium Member
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA

maartena

Premium Member

Google doesn't use consumer ISP pipes!

USERS use consumer ISP pipes, and browse to, among others, Google.

Unless they all start charging at once, the minute this happens to TWC, I'll switch to slower DSL immediately.

Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02

Karl Bode to adisor19

News Guy

to adisor19

Re: Google Uses 21 Times More Bandwidth than it Pays For

No, Cleland's report was in there from the beginning. He just didn't read the story.
Karl Bode

1 edit

1 recommendation

Karl Bode to PToN

News Guy

to PToN
Your point is valid, but keep in mind the report's author, Scott Cleland, is a paid lobbyist for AT&T and Verizon. Arguing science with guys like that is like trying to box with a river. Their interest isn't in the facts. Should you deconstruct one absurd point, another will simply pop up to take its place.

sapo
Cruising Down Memory Lane
Premium Member
join:2002-09-16
Sacramento, CA

sapo

Premium Member

Google should reverse this

Without Google, I might not even use the internet. Google should block content and demand ISPs pay them for their services. Google is the real king here.
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

1 recommendation

patcat88 to Z80A

Member

to Z80A

Re: Ah, a free ISP

Prius drivers need to be put in prison for gas tax evasion

morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000

morbo to o2cool8

Member

to o2cool8

Re: So, where does it end?

Google directly threatens their cash cows. Google is innovating while telco is a parasitic cancer, stuck in the 1960s. Don't forget we are talking about Ma Bell (or international equivalent) and their monopoly entitlement mentality.
ISurfTooMuch
join:2007-04-23
Tuscaloosa, AL

ISurfTooMuch to o2cool8

Member

to o2cool8
This is just my guess, but I think they're targeting Google because it's the world's most popular search engine, plus it owns YouTube and Gmail, which are also popular sites. I believe the ISP execs think that, if they can make Google roll over, many other sites will fall in line.

This was the same strategy SCO used when they sued IBM for allegedly stealing their intellectual property by using Linux. They figured that Big Blue would cough up some cash to make the whole thing quietly go away, after which all the smaller players would pay up to avoid getting stomped all over, since, if IBM paid, then SCO must have had a good case, so they'd better pay, too. So how'd that strategy work out for you, Darl?

Now that I think about it, I believe this is supposed to be what you do when you first go to prison. You find the biggest, meanest inmate you think you can take and beat the hell out of him. If you manage to do it, then everyone else will respect you and leave you alone. And I'm sure companies like AT&T and Telefonica feel that they're big enough to take an upstart like Google. After all, they probably have office furniture that's been around longer than Google has existed as a company. But, just as in prison, the big problem comes if they lose the fight. They're going to look stupid, and everyone from customers to government regulators are going to pile on.

Z80A
Premium Member
join:2009-11-23

Z80A to patcat88

Premium Member

to patcat88

Re: Ah, a free ISP

In Sacramento, they are already peeved about everyone buying fuel efficient cars since it cuts into their massive gas tax revenues. They want to force everyone to have GPS in their cars and when you fill up, it reports to the pump how many miles you drove and adds the per mile tax.

Not even the smelly Prius driving hippies are safe from tax, borrow and waste government.

gatorkram
Need for Speed
Premium Member
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC

gatorkram

Premium Member

What logic?

If google is getting a free ride, just where IS the ride free?

Anything that might be going over the ISPs lines in question, would be from a request of their users.

Are their users not paying for the bandwidth they generate?

Maybe these people don't understand how the internet works, or at least understand how tcp/ip works, in a client server type situation.

What am I missing? How is anyone fooled by this argument?
33358088 (banned)
join:2008-09-23

33358088 (banned)

Member

ill make a song it goes like this

PAY nnnnn pay n pay
cause the isp is night we ar day
PAY nnnnn pay n pay
this over charging us is gay
PAY nnnnn pay n pay
we gonna make stupid isps pay instead

AlexNYC
join:2001-06-02
Edwards, CO

AlexNYC to Z80A

Member

to Z80A

Re: Ah, a free ISP

WOW ... surely that can't be true .... you are joking right?
deadzoned
Premium Member
join:2005-04-13
Cypress, TX

deadzoned

Premium Member

Dumb Pipes Please!

This demonstrates yet again why we our Government needs to step in and classify all broadband providers as "dumb pipes". We would not be having this stupid discussion otherwise.

halfband
Premium Member
join:2002-06-01
Huntsville, AL

halfband

Premium Member

Time for the ISP to become a dumb pipe

It is time to separate the ISPs from the content carried. The ISPs need to become dumb pipes.

canesfan2001
join:2003-02-04
Hialeah, FL

canesfan2001 to FFH5

Member

to FFH5

Re: Google Uses 21 Times More Bandwidth than it Pays For

Where's the bury button?

Z80A
Premium Member
join:2009-11-23

Z80A to AlexNYC

Premium Member

to AlexNYC

Re: Ah, a free ISP

It hasn't passed but there are legislators who bring it up all the time and it was all the rage 2004-2007 with CalTrans looking for big money lobbying hard for it.
»news.google.com/archives ··· av=hist7

It was brought up in Massachusetts too. Even Transportation Secretary LaHood endorsed the idea before Obama wisely nixed it.
ISurfTooMuch
join:2007-04-23
Tuscaloosa, AL

ISurfTooMuch to gatorkram

Member

to gatorkram

Re: What logic?

You aren't missing anything. Your only error is assuming logic plays a role here. These guys know full well how the Internet works; they simply want to double-dip by charging both their customers and the content providers. While their "argument" makes no sense to anyone with knowledge of how the Internet works, they're betting there will be enough people out there who don't know and who will therefore buy into their claims to get away with this scheme. And, believe me, there are plenty of people who don't have the slightest clue how this stuff works. Remember Ted "Tubes" Stevens? His comments on how the Internet works would be comical if it weren't for the fact that it's people like him who set policy for things they don't even remotely understand.

swhx7
Premium Member
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia

swhx7 to Z80A

Premium Member

to Z80A

Re: Ah, a free ISP

It would be just as reasonable for Google to demand fees from the consumer ISPs for responding to web requests from those IPs. With two ISPs in an area, if one paid the fees the other would be at a disadvantag by not "offering" Google on its network.

That would be Google going "evil" (contrary to its supposed slogan). But it would be the same thing these ISPs are trying now, in reverse. Why not ISPs pay Google - and Google pay ISPs - and make the fees equal? It would all would zero out, and there would be no controversy about neutrality.

The economic model of the internet has always been peering among the "big pipe" owners, or semi-peering with payments, and everyone else paying their local provider for access. The ISPs get paid for traffic both coming and going, to each subscriber, and the cost is the same regardless whether it is Google, or a household or some other party that the packets are going to or coming from.
page: 1 · 2 · 3 · next