dynodbPremium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN | reply to kamm
Re: Physics fail You have absolutely no clue as to what you're talking about. Zero. |
|
|
|
dynodbPremium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
1 edit | Re: Physics fail
You provided nothing remotely close to a "fact". Ranting about make-believe 1500% profit margins is not fact.
My opinions are my own. They're also more valid than those of someone like yourself who has no idea what they're talking about. |
|
 ArrayListnetbus developerPremium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL | he said that the only reason there are any "congestion problems is because of a lack of investment by the ISP. Which is absolutely true. |
|
dynodbPremium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN | said by ArrayList:he said that the only reason there are any "congestion problems is because of a lack of investment by the ISP. Which is absolutely true.
Only in the sense that if providers spent an unlimited amount of money on an unlimited amount of capacity- then yes. That's like arguing that the only reason that rush hour traffic is congested is because they didn't instantly add more lanes at the first sign of trouble.
One can't disregard the fact that bandwidth consumption per user has been seeing double-digit increases per quarter. The same trunks / nodes that only six months ago were perfectly fine might now be congested, even without an increase in the number of subscribers riding it.
Obviously, the providers are for-profit businesses. The expectation that any amount of profit made should be spend on endless upgrades to benefit a very small percentage of "bandwidth hogs" isn't realistic. |
|
 coldmoonPremium
join:2002-02-04
Broadway, NC
 ·Windstream
| said by dynodb:said by ArrayList:he said that the only reason there are any "congestion problems is because of a lack of investment by the ISP. Which is absolutely true.
~snip~ One can't disregard the fact that bandwidth consumption per user has been seeing double-digit increases per quarter. The same trunks / nodes that only six months ago were perfectly fine might now be congested, even without an increase in the number of subscribers riding it. Obviously, the providers are for-profit businesses. The expectation that any amount of profit made should be spend on endless upgrades to benefit a very small percentage of "bandwidth hogs" isn't realistic. Well here's an easy fix: STOP OVER SUBSCRIBING! Next, expand your deployments when you feel like adding more customers. Your assertions that the problem is due to "hogs" is a straw man that is CAUSED by the ISP over subscribing and pushing that new node beyond what it was reasonably meant to handle properly.
Stop wasting the reader's and consumer's time as well as tying up the courts to keep from having to service your customers appropriately and fully.
--
Returnil - 21st Century body armor for your PC |
|
| reply to dynodb
said by dynodb:said by kamm:said by dynodb:You have absolutely no clue as to what you're talking about. Zero.
Ouch. What's up, no more instructions from your masters? You cannot reach them or is it now way over your silly little astroturf head? You know, stupid little lies come from similar people - and that means they run out of them pretty quickly as soon as someone tackles them with facts.  You provided nothing remotely close to a "fact". Ranting about make-believe 1500% profit margins is not fact. My opinions are my own. They're also more valid than those of someone like yourself who has no idea what they're talking about. Opinions, assholes, and all that. |
|
| reply to dynodb
So if UBB is the answer that means that there are no longer capital expenditures to fund and prices can fall.
In addition because we're charging for usage there will be no fixed costs, only per byte charges. That means no $50 base plan, just per byte billing where customers actually have the ability to regulate and control costs.
If that's going to be allowed where there is no competition then the service is a utility and the price per byte should be regulated and justified just like the gas and power company. Afterall we can't allow monopoly service providers to use low competition areas with high prices to fund high competition areas with low prices.
And as was pointed out in the article, if UBB is allowed to go forward at that point the ISP should be subject to the same meter rules that the gas and electric companies are. Such as that the meter be tested and certified accurate by an independent testing laboratory. Otherwise the usage numbers are just a bunch of crap. |
|
 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | reply to coldmoon
said by coldmoon:Well here's an easy fix: STOP OVER SUBSCRIBING!
And then you & almost all residential subscribers couldn't afford the monthly bill that would cost. Oversubscribing is the ONLY reason broadband is affordable to huge numbers of people. |
|
 kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY | reply to dynodb
said by dynodb:said by kamm:said by dynodb:You have absolutely no clue as to what you're talking about. Zero.
Ouch. What's up, no more instructions from your masters? You cannot reach them or is it now way over your silly little astroturf head? You know, stupid little lies come from similar people - and that means they run out of them pretty quickly as soon as someone tackles them with facts. You provided nothing remotely close to a "fact". Ranting about make-believe 1500% profit margins is not fact. My opinions are my own. They're also more valid than those of someone like yourself who has no idea what they're talking about. Except it's a well-known fact, little paid astroturfer, check wholesale prices and then your masters' proposals.
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE] |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY | reply to dynodb
said by dynodb:said by ArrayList:he said that the only reason there are any "congestion problems is because of a lack of investment by the ISP. Which is absolutely true.
Only in the sense that if providers spent an unlimited amount of money on an unlimited amount of capacity- then yes. That's like arguing that the only reason that rush hour traffic is congested is because they didn't instantly add more lanes at the first sign of trouble. One can't disregard the fact that bandwidth consumption per user has been seeing double-digit increases per quarter. The same trunks / nodes that only six months ago were perfectly fine might now be congested, even without an increase in the number of subscribers riding it. Obviously, the providers are for-profit businesses. The expectation that any amount of profit made should be spend on endless upgrades to benefit a very small percentage of "bandwidth hogs" isn't realistic. ANother full of BS astroturfer reply - wholesale bandwidth prices are ALWAYS FALLING and pipes are getting fatter and fatter.
It is really nobody else but scumbag corporations like yours who overcharges and THEN has the thick skin to complain about growth in needs.
Scumbags, rotten, crooked lying scumbags, ALL CABLECORPS.
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE] |
|
 espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
 ·Vitelity VOIP
| reply to coldmoon
said by coldmoon:Well here's an easy fix: STOP OVER SUBSCRIBING! That type of solution exists. Ever price out DSx/OCx services? That is 100% dedicated last-mile bandwidth.
Oversubscription is what keeps high speed Internet access affordable to the masses. |
|
espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Vitelity VOIP
| reply to kamm
said by kamm:ANother full of BS astroturfer reply - wholesale bandwidth prices are ALWAYS FALLING and pipes are getting fatter and fatter. This doesn't magically happen though. You know what, hard drives are getting cheaper and larger every day. How much did your hard drive magically increase in size last month?
It isn't cheaper for you to add more storage -- you'd have to spend cash to get more capacity -- but you'll get more storage for your dollar this time around than you did the last time you bought a hard drive. Except eventually you run out of what is feasible to put into a single box for storage and you end up buying a SAN storage array and building out the SAN infrastructure to support it, etc.
Capacity augmentation is a system-wide expense. |
|
coldmoonPremium
join:2002-02-04
Broadway, NC Reviews:
·Windstream
| reply to espaeth
said by espaeth:said by coldmoon:Well here's an easy fix: STOP OVER SUBSCRIBING! That type of solution exists. Ever price out DSx/OCx services? That is 100% dedicated last-mile bandwidth. Oversubscription is what keeps high speed Internet access affordable to the masses. What does getting a t1, etc line have to do with ISPs over subscribing the equipment they grudgingly deploy? That sounds more like bait and switch to me...
Hey, if you don't like not being able to use the connection you are paying for because the pipe has too many people using it, you should look over here at this expensive and thoroughly ridiculous option.
If subscribing within your equipment's limitations with expansion in step with subscription is too expensive, prove it. Lets see some real world numbers for representative selections of rural and urban environments so we can all see the truth of what you are saying. My expectation is that you will simply reply with more double-speak...
Anyone taking bets?
--
Returnil - 21st Century body armor for your PC |
|
espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Vitelity VOIP
| said by coldmoon:said by espaeth:said by coldmoon:Well here's an easy fix: STOP OVER SUBSCRIBING! That type of solution exists. Ever price out DSx/OCx services? That is 100% dedicated last-mile bandwidth. Oversubscription is what keeps high speed Internet access affordable to the masses. What does getting a t1, etc line have to do with ISPs over subscribing the equipment they grudgingly deploy? It provides exactly what you are asking for -- a 100% dedicated last-mile circuit with pricing that is regulated by the local Public Utilities Commission. You can order a DSx/OCx circuit through any CLEC or ILEC you wish and you will have absolutely no competition for moving bits across the wire. said by coldmoon:Hey, if you don't like not being able to use the connection you are paying for because the pipe has too many people using it, you should look over here at this expensive and thoroughly ridiculous option. Hold on a sec. You're the one that jumped to the extreme of saying that dedicated facilities should be provided. The bottom line is that most Internet subscribers don't drive their connection to 100% -- not even remotely close. Building out dedicated facilities when average usage is relatively low is ridiculously (and needlessly) expensive. said by coldmoon:If subscribing within your equipment's limitations with expansion in step with subscription is too expensive, prove it. Lets see some real world numbers for representative selections of rural and urban environments so we can all see the truth of what you are saying. The problem is accounting for the top percentage of subscribers who are placing excessive demand on the infrastructure. The top 1 percent of broadband connections is responsible for more than 20 percent of total Internet traffic. The top 10 percent of connections is responsible for over 60 percent of broadband Internet traffic, worldwide. Source:»www.cisco.com/en/US/solutions/co···_WP.htmlFrom a business standpoint, there is more motivation to keep the 90% of revenue generating subscribers who are presenting 40% of the demand happier than the top 10% who are presenting 60% of the demand. If there was growth in revenue tied to growth in usage this wouldn't be as big of a problem. |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | reply to dynodb
If a bandwidth shortage is looming, why do consumer BB packages keep getting faster for the same price? Something doesn't add up. Wouldn't offering faster speeds accelerate the arrival of the coming bandwidth shortage? Isn't this like an all-you-can-eat buffet keeping the price steady but giving folks bigger plates, bigger cups and a doggy bag to fill at the end of their meal? |
|
coldmoonPremium
join:2002-02-04
Broadway, NC Reviews:
·Windstream
| reply to espaeth
It provides exactly what you are asking for -- a 100% dedicated last-mile circuit with pricing that is regulated by the local Public Utilities Commission. You can order a DSx/OCx circuit through any CLEC or ILEC you wish and you will have absolutely no competition for moving bits across the wire.
Hold on a sec. You're the one that jumped to the extreme of saying that dedicated facilities should be provided. The bottom line is that most Internet subscribers don't drive their connection to 100% -- not even remotely close. Building out dedicated facilities when average usage is relatively low is ridiculously (and needlessly) expensive.
--
Returnil - 21st Century body armor for your PC |
|
espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Vitelity VOIP
| said by coldmoon: What I asked for is for providers to stop over subscribing so that the service the consumer is paying for is delivered at all times as it should be. said by coldmoon:No, I said nothing extreme and certainly did not call for dedicated facilities. That is still, for all practical purposes, dedicated facilities. Even if you take shared access and hard provision it such that there is no overlap in capacity, the costs would still be pretty close to dedicated facilities anyway because you have no stat-mux efficiency to balance out the costs.
So ISPs should over-provision the hell out of everything such that the bulk of the capacity sits idle continuously?
That sounds cheap. |
|
cramer
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:7 | reply to espaeth
Ever price out DSx/OCx services? That is 100% dedicated last-mile bandwidth.
As for "dedicated bandwidth"... in modern networking, even what you might think is a point-to-point dedicated circuit usually isn't. (see also: optical switching and circuit emulation.) |
|
| reply to espaeth
said by espaeth:said by coldmoon:Well here's an easy fix: STOP OVER SUBSCRIBING! That type of solution exists. Ever price out DSx/OCx services? That is 100% dedicated last-mile bandwidth. Oversubscription is what keeps high speed Internet access affordable to the masses. Not entirely true. Competition is what keeps high speed internet access affordable to everybody. Competition breeds innovation breeds cheaper and faster connections.
With this UBB thing, there would be no competition, no incentive for innovation, no cheaper alternative, no faster alternative.
Bear in mind, telecommunications in Canada are regulated by the CRTC. They dictate tariffs and access and ultimately end user prices. This UBB thing is a decision of the CRTC. Everybody is against it. Except of course Bell the incumbent. |
|
