| If its inevitable, then regulate it as a utility. Then you can have carriers pricing models be subjected to the scrutiny of whomever regulates it, such as a PUC...wouldn't that be fun....
Then you could define a cap as cost, which would also give the regulating body room to scrutinize their networks to either prove or deny the necessity for a cap.
Since a cap does absolutely nothing for congestion, carriers would have to justify the cap for other reasons.
Karl cites the effort put forth by Comcast to evolve with changing demands, but Comcast is one of the few that are taking a proactive approach.
It seems to me that all of this talk about metered biulling is distracting us from the conversation we should be having. That is...where do we want to be with our broadband services 10 years from now and how do we get there?
12 years ago , then President Clinton gave billions of dollars in tax incentives to these douchebags ( change if you like Karl) for a broadband highway that was supposedly going to deliver 40mbps to every home in America. 12 years later half the country is living under neglected dsl networks and the other half is getting gouged for 10 mbps or better. The current carrier system collectively has brought nothing but stagnation.
This is what needs to be addressed.
Well, this rant was therapeutic if nothing else!
--
BF69~~~Please stop suffocating gerbils! |
