1 edit | reply to powerhog
Re: Civil rights groups say bandwidth hogs need managing said by powerhog:I'm sure that I'd be considered a bandwith hog by most standards. Yet I've never had any kind of P2P (or similar) client installed on any of my machines. So where does the "shaping" stop? You going to block my VPN connections, my ssh and sftp traffic, my http/s and my e-mail? Packet shaping and/or secret caps would not be MY way to combat bandwidth hogs, but Comcast should do what they feels is the best way for their business.
If it was me, I'd charge by the byte after passing some threshold. That is, sell service by "bytes transferred" tiers instead of "speed tiers". Bandwidth hogs would need to be very rich to pay for ridiculous transfer amounts. The size of the tiers would be based on well known methods of optimizing income collected.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
 powerhogStinkin' up the jointPremium
join:2000-12-14
Owasso, OK | So why are you agreeing with these idiots who say that bandwith hogs create a need for P2P (or any traffic) to be throttled? |
|
 NOCManMacChatterPremium
join:2004-09-30
Colorado Springs, CO | reply to fAcEtIOUs
Yeah have you seen what they consider acceptable usage.
Some companies think 2 dollars a meg over a few hundred gigs passed is a reasonable amount.
Billing by the byte is exactly what telco's wanted to do. Instead of charging the content providers they'll just make it where you accept their walled garden approach to the internet IE their AOL or pay up the nose to access something like google, iTunes, etc.
Unlimited means you access what you want. The minute they begin billing by the byte is the minute you cede any reasonable expectation to access what you want.
Like it or not those same music thieves are the reason any of these companies have upgraded any of their facilities. |
|
