AT&T Front Group Claims Internet End Is Nigh

ipv6

lol? how does ipv6 have anything to do with this...

They want to control it is obvious. If they do not get what they want they will fire more workers so armagedon can eventully happen itself. It is so obvious f... morons from IIA

The solution is to regulate AT&T as a "dumb pipe" provider!

because this is insane.

not surprising at all that it's these people behind the fun hogwash here...

How they got from "intelligent" design proponents, to "very unintelligent" network design proponents, makes no sense. Maybe somebody likes to fund them, and they like to produce propaganda in return.

Reboot that MFer!

u give me the lulz

lulz

LOL, what south park episode is that from, since all of them are online now?

»www.southparkstudios.com ··· /166179/

thanks Simba!

That was the funniest episode I've ever seen!

The whole thing is a scam to get taxpayer money. Look at the automakers-who flew from Detroit to D.C. yesterday on THREE corporate jets-to ask for taxpayer money to bail them out from their own bad decisions.

The PERFECT example of how truly CLUELESS the heads of big business are. These IDIOTS didn't even learn from the AIG PR fiasco 'holiday' last month!

Now AT&T wants their share-and is threatenng to have 'rolling Internet blackouts' if they don't get it.

Who's next- Comcast? Time Warner? Verizon?

How much do you want to bet that if we had COMPETITION that all of this would be a red herring?

Unfortunately, the FCC under the Republicans made sure that THERE IS NO REAL INTERNET COMPETITION!

One MORE Bush mess for Obama to clean up!

Just look how well deregulation has worked on Wall Street and the banks.

Man, no competition? Damn, then who are these NuVox, XO, Deltacom, Cavalier, Cox, TW Telecom, cBeyond, and Cogent guys I have customers telling they are getting quotes from daily. Must be imaginary!

The US has no residential broadband competition. You typically have a choice between Comcast or AT&T. Which one is worse I'm not entirely sure.

There is no way for a new player to enter the game since the telco's and cable companies own the pipes.

I live in Denver and my only options are expensive Comcast or crummy Qwest for broadband internet.

I'll agree with that, it is rather limited on residential Internet side. Though, while it is a huge money maker, it is only one part of the business, and basically only one product.

Yeah, there's competition-IF you want to shell out over 3 grand a month to buy an OC3! The average consumer, if they are lucky has TWO choices for broadband: Cable or DSL
Even here, in the heart of Los Angeles, I have TWO broadband choices, Time Warner or AT&T. See, AT&T maintains a MONOPOLY on dry line DSL in their California operating area.

OC3 cost a lot more than 3 grand, and I was refering to business services, lots of competition. Not enough profit for residential services for providers to come in, I guess.

What a load of nonsensical BS. There MAGNITUDES more residential customers than OC3 ones so it would make a LOT MORE sense to invest - only if areas weren't held hostage by incumbent monopolies like Time Warner.

Exactly, magnitude of customers, but low profit margin. That is what we call a barrier of entry into a market. It would take huge capital to cover enough customers to start making a decent profit, ergo, less competition.

Another nonsese. It takes a lot LESS in fact, provided you're wiring up densely populated areas - but, of course, that would assume you are willing to compete.

Which is clearly NOT the case here, in the US.

CABLE INDUSTRY = DISGUSTING, PIECE OF SHIT MONOPOLIES, ANTI-EVOLUTION, GREEDY, USELESS CRAP COMPANIES

You clearly have no idea of the capital cost it takes to wire each house, even densely populated. Especially for a service that bills maybe $40. Unless you can right off the bat offer TV, phone, and other features, which add tremendously to the capital cost. Compared to business where you can make 3-8 times more off a single customer, and it is even more densely populated, i.e. buildings with multiple tenants, shopping centers, etc. where you'll sometimes have residential buildings, but not as many as those that are commercial. This is why there is plenty of competition for business, and mot much for residential.

Have you born like this? There's no competition whatsoever in most big cities, not matter where you live when you are ordering cable tv, internet service etc.

Cable companies are the most disgusting PoS business monopolies, they should be squashed like a bug.

Not sure what "Have you born like this?" means, but I think you have mistaken what I was writing about. I was writing of business services. There is plenty of competition there. Services cost more per customer, thus bigger profits to be made with your investment.

Well if Att had lived up to its origanal deal with the F.C.C. they would be laying more Fiber to the house FTTH.
And this would be a nonissue.

Saw this on CNN today...

»www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/bi ··· dex.html

Maybe if all you freeloaders would stop using your internets so much, the pipes wouldn't clog and we wouldn't have to worry about the exaflood in the first place.

Indeed. If we are to stop the pending bandwidth apocalypse, we should all significantly reduce our internet usage and increase our tithes to the great and benevolent network operators.

I suggest we stop processes for downloading software/firmware patches immediately and competely eliminate audio and video streaming. We should return to the days of feature light web pages and plain text email.

its a series of tubes!

»www.youtube.com/watch?v= ··· 1nOuCN9c

»www.youtube.com/watch?v= ··· Xc7pw4go

- A

someone has way to much time on there hands

Maybe if they didnt get immunity they wouldnt of rose back up to the surface like the turds they are, and come demanding things. I wonder if i block att ip address ranges how limited i would be?

A lot of these predictions that the internet WON'T face much higher bandwidth demand is based on past statistics. But a paradigm break is in process. The past statistics can't recognize the tremendous growth of online high def video that is coming. Those predicting drastic growth may be more prescient than the statisticians looking backward.

Likewise online streaming HD may be dramatically less than people predict, and in any case if AT&T cannot deal with it they should look at their residential offerings and amend them accordingly, rather than predicting some nonsense bandwidth apocalypse on the wider internet. Contrary to the apparent beliefs of AT&T there is an internet beyond their access and core network which is doing just fine.

I'd point to the growth of AmsIX - »www.ams-ix.net/technical/stats/ - between July and November of this year they saw a growth in utilisation of over 50%, and this was accomplished just fine. In the AT&T world such growth is unimaginable, yet there they are supplying this interconnection bandwidth.

This is just dumb and unfortunately at the moment I can't even seem to formulate a polite response - which is a bit rare for me. Like an old CEO of mine once said about someone, AT&T just don't get it.

The proverbial "last mile" and the servers interfacing with the content will fail long before the backbone itself fails due to capacity issues. The US national backbone is the easiest portion to upgrade (comparatively) and a problem that even just blindly throwing money at will solve for many years to come. Finding efficient technology and means to deal with the amount of content (data), now that's a bit harder but manageable. Getting the majority of residential customer up to the "sweet spot" for connectivity (100 Mbps IMO), thats a bit harder and costlier.

Verizon seems to have figured this out, hell, even Comcast seems to have figured this out - maybe it's time for another new AT&T? This one seems a lot like the previous incarnation.

"According to Odlyzko, the current Internet growth rate of about 50% per year"

"The exponential explosion of content will persist"

50% growth per year is not exponential. . .

I'm not sure "exponential explosion" even makes grammatical sense.

This is all because ISPs refuse to shell out cash to invest in new technologies and expend and upgrade infrastructure. Let them burn just like the auto sector.

sdvsv

You know this picture could be right just like when comcast got caught traffic shaping and maybe they will unleash the exaflood.

You know obama has done said he will take down the group known as anonymous cough cough /b/ »blog.wired.com/defense/2 ··· a-3.html

Does it seem to anybody else that servers and not the connection are often to blame for bottlenecking? Almost every residential line is easy to max out these days but I've noticed that most pages that get overloaded respond quickly, but have back-end issues that end in a denial.

I don't claim to have the best perspective to comment on this though..

»www.andhranews.net/Busin ··· 4777.asp

Remember it is only to protect your children just like they done in australia.

If your not ready BY NOW for a "exaflood", then get out of the business. If an ISP is really that "scared" about a fictions "exaflood" flood, then I believe that company should be taken out of business because they obviously can't see past their own greed. And if anyone believes in this "exaflood", then get off the internet now because your clogging the tubes!

Wait a minute, didn't people scream about the end of the world back in ancient times? Hows about the Y2K bug destroying all of our computers?....and isn't this considered terrorizing the public into thinking the internet is going to end aka being a terrorist?
I really can't wait for the pro-consumers to get into the FCC to start slapping these bozo CEO's around. -
"We want more money!"
*slap*
"We want less regulation!"
*slap slap*
"Can't we get a few dollars?"
*slap slap slap*
"I'm sorry, I'll goto my room."

So that's what Nostradamus was talking about when he predicted the "end of the world"... cool.

Now, who's the Anti-christ? (Some CEO perhaps?)

All CEO's are evil greedy little bastards so he must be one of them. The way things are going in this world today Armageddon seems like it's right around the corner.

and in this case there are none, ever.

All the broadband price wars are to blame for the "so-called" bad economic condition of these providers. If they just charge a "fair" price for the access that could actually account for the required backbone capacity, then there would be no cause for alarm. There can't be an "Exaflood" if you haven't over-committed your own damn last mile networks without enough transit capacity. If you have over-committed, then the costing model to finance the required capacity is all screwed up. This is nothing but a simple economic problem.

All the broadband providers should be in the same or similar financial situation as far as funding core transit capacity is concerned as they have all slashed and burned their prices to the bone. So when performance gets shitty on Cable Company A because of an "Exaflood", customers might be willing to pay a little more to Telco B for access with better transit capacity or vice-versa.

What do you know...the free market economic model actually might work. Supply and Demand.

Now if the government in its infinite wisdom decides to regulate access to broadband services, then by all means the carriers should have the right to subsidies to implement those loss leader services. The argument that they can't afford the necessary core transit bandwidth to support their own customer base, however, is plain bullshit. They own all the contracts themselves and can set their own pricing like big boys. If they are stupid enough to provide unlimited bandwidth contracts to peering partners and content providers or broadband customers, then they deserve what they get coming to them.

Typical in AT&T fashion once they dominate they pull this crap. Consumers need to complain like they did in the past and break up AT&T again. If it wasn't for the pro business government we wouldn't have found ourselves in this mess. The day they cap me is the day I disconnect.