reply to elray
Re: If the 'Bandwidth Hog is a Myth' I disagree. Caps do have a consequence. There's always a cause and effect. I believe what the article and Karl are trying to state is that caps are being used for reasons that cannot be substantiated by facts. Rather than targeting the "Bandwidth Hog", the facts conclude that caps simply target those who transfer a lot of data in a given time period and that the correlation between "a lot of data per month" and "peak bandwidth usage" (aka the bandwidth hog) is weak.
Based on these conclusions, either the ISPs are clueless as to managing their network or they employ caps for different reasons. Those reasons could be to control total data transferred in an effort to make the service unattractive for uses that require a lot of data to be transferred. One possible service is video. To put another way, streaming DVD-quality H.264 video doesn't use too much bandwidth (~1.5Mbps-2Mbps) but with caps, over time it transfers too much data.