Reviews:
 ·Comcast
·Charter
1 edit | reply to FLATLINE
Re: Awesome news! said by FLATLINE:I love this as well. Mainly because ISPs are turning bandwidth into a commodity and I don't believe it should be like that. Bandwidth is a means to an end where many of the services used over the internet are where the real money should be made. If the real money is made in the over the Internet services, why do businesses want to invest in the commodity infrastructure? |
|
|
|
1 edit | Carefull now. I didn't say that's where the real money is made. I'm saying that's where it should be made. Like for instance streaming movies and tv. If done right broadband can be cheaper than what most of us get charged now while still providing enough capital for network investment. Companies who provide services like streaming tv would charge appropriately and also contribute to the costs of using the network But in this case there is no company responsible for investing in infrastructure directly. As it is right now The cost of gaining access especially after seeing where isp's are looking to go with the pricing of bandwidth will be more expensive than the many services we use. Its backwards in my opinion and is slowing progress. |
|
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Charter
| Yep. And as the services migrate and the real money/revenue migrates away from infrastructure providers, the capital investment (without funding) around "dumb pipe" growth will logically be called into question...
Investment costs in network growth don't go away, they shift. But who do they shift to?
said by FLATLINE:Companies who provide services like streaming tv would charge appropriately and also contribute to the costs of using the network In the real world this is not really the case. These Companies do not contribute directly. They go to a "peer" or transit supplier of the broadband infrastructure provider and negotiate a below-cost or free connection. The peer or transit supplier doesn't carry the traffic more than 1 router so they can offer this. Many times offering it for free allows them to may $$ from their transit customer, the infrastructure provider.
So, the Companies who provide streaming TV do not pay the full cost of infrastructure growth to deliver these services and the infrastructure company actually carrying the streaming TV to your home does not get any recovery on these costs. In some cases their costs actually go up unless they give it away for free.
Net neutrality has many benefits, but one thing people don't realize is that it guarantees that the only people that will pay for the full cost of end to end traffic are the consumers. |
|
| Youve been fooled into thinking what your being charged now isnt enough to turn a nice profit while also having money to invest into the infrastructure.
In the real world things can change and be made right. The reason why you dont see the right thing being done is because people like you and me havent spoken loud enough, we havent voted with our wallets, we didnt vote for the right political leaders, we havent pressured our political leaders enough, we havent banded together as one large consumer group and pooled our resources to overcome lobbyists. I could spend all day on examples of what we havent done. The American citizen has become a non player in todays world and untill we get our act together its only going to get worse.
Its not like this is the only area that needs attention from us either. We have become slackers on these fronts. Maybe we always have been I dunno. |
|
Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
San Jose, CA Reviews:
 ·SONIC.NET
| reply to devnuller
said by devnuller:Net neutrality has many benefits, but one thing people don't realize is that it guarantees that the only people that will pay for the full cost of end to end traffic are the consumers. That's only one version of "net neutrality", but one of the ones that makes the most sense. It also is quite reasonable to understand and reasonable in fact: if we are paying for it, we are the bosses, moreso (not entirely). Thus comes the benefits of being boss. Unfortunately, since it's delivered en masse via mass production, there is some aggregation of those payments that get funneled through things we individually don't control, so there disappears most of what we loose of our individuality and control. However, it's definitely a model that makes sense in terms of being less fascist and controlling of the individuals of the populace, and therefore beneficial. |
|
