telcolackey
The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA
| reply to B
Re: [TWC] Pricing model changing soon
said by B  :I'm not a multi-terabyte P2P DVD Downloader, and I don't like having to check for permission with my ISP before using my Internet connection this week As you shouldn't, but if you leave your HD Video conf running 7x24 you will have to pay for it like leaving your water running, all your lights on and your windows open in the winter.
--
"Believe only half of what you see and nothing that you hear." - Dinah Craik |
|
tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
clubs:
 ·T-Mobile US
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| said by telcolackey :said by B :I'm not a multi-terabyte P2P DVD Downloader, and I don't like having to check for permission with my ISP before using my Internet connection this week As you shouldn't, but if you leave your HD Video conf running 7x24 you will have to pay for it like leaving your water running, all your lights on and your windows open in the winter. except that bandwidth doesn't expend resources. It's either a "use it or lose it" product - not a finite resource which can be saved and used elsewhere.
--
|- The LP »www.lp.org/issues/issues.shtml -|
|- Cato @ Liberty »www.cato-at-liberty.org -|
|- Ron Paul »www.ronpaul2008.com/ -| |
|
Boinkfoobarnet
@wayport.net | Umm ... the equipment is capital intensive and the bandwidth is purchased. Me thinks you have not taken undergrad economics  |
|
tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
clubs:
·T-Mobile US
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by Boinkfoobarnet :Umm ... the equipment is capital intensive and the bandwidth is purchased. Me thinks you have not taken undergrad economics Me thinks you earned a degree in overanalyzation.
I didn't think I needed to spend the time to describe precisely that there is a set amount of throughput per second that can be used and that there was investment to be able to transmit the data that is transferred, and that networking agreements also play into TW's decision, etc.. etc.. I believe that most readers can grasp that network equipment and data is *not* of the same nature as oil flowing through pipelines experiencing wear as more oil is pumped which deteriorates the infrastructure, which over time leads to ever-increasing expenditures on maintenance, etc...
An ISP can at best be described as a street which doesn't generate the traffic, it just facilitates its transfer. However, unlike a road which experiences physical wear and tear from the weight of ever-flowing traffic (as well as large loads on trucks, for example), a user transmitting a 4GB file does no more "damage" to the network infrastructure than 4 users transmitting 1GB files each, or 400 users transmitting 10MB a piece, contrary to what the ISP's claim.
Is that a slight bit more clear?
--
|- The LP »www.lp.org/issues/issues.shtml -|
|- Cato @ Liberty »www.cato-at-liberty.org -|
|- Ron Paul »www.ronpaul2008.com/ -| |
|
Boinkcomcastcom
@wayport.net
| said by tiger72 :said by Boinkfoobarnet :Umm ... the equipment is capital intensive and the bandwidth is purchased. Me thinks you have not taken undergrad economics Me thinks you earned a degree in overanalyzation. I didn't think I needed to spend the time to describe precisely that there is a set amount of throughput per second that can be used and that there was investment to be able to transmit the data that is transferred, and that networking agreements also play into TW's decision, etc.. etc.. I believe that most readers can grasp that network equipment and data is *not* of the same nature as oil flowing through pipelines experiencing wear as more oil is pumped which deteriorates the infrastructure, which over time leads to ever-increasing expenditures on maintenance, etc... An ISP can at best be described as a street which doesn't generate the traffic, it just facilitates its transfer. However, unlike a road which experiences physical wear and tear from the weight of ever-flowing traffic (as well as large loads on trucks, for example), a user transmitting a 4GB file does no more "damage" to the network infrastructure than 4 users transmitting 1GB files each, or 400 users transmitting 10MB a piece, contrary to what the ISP's claim. Is that a slight bit more clear? It is clear, but the following applies. A business model provides the ability to make net revenue.
Assuming that:
- 5% of the users utilizes 50% of the consumption
- This consumption is illegal sharing of multimedia content.
As a consumer I refuse to pay more for my bandwidth to support these P2P kings ... network abuses that are breaking the law. Why should I fund the capital for network hardware and the bandwidth to keep up with the P2P abuse?
I'm cheap! |
|
