 chesney09
Premium
join:2004-07-26
Redford, MI
clubs: | Would seem pretty simple... Everyone already pays for their access to the internet.
Why should this even be an issue? I'd have to agree, it does equate to digital extortion. | |
|
 | 
technick
Premium
join:2000-12-16
Loganville, GA
| Re: Would seem pretty simple... said by chesney09  :Everyone already pays for their access to the internet. Why should this even be an issue? I'd have to agree, it does equate to digital extortion. I've gotta rant on this one. Bellsouth is a bunch of greedy dumb @$$ @#$@#% sucking #@$@% flaming pieces of sh!t. I say F Bellsouth and everything they stand for.
Like I said before if I could unplug Bellsouth completely from existance I would. There's simply no excuse for this type of behavior.
--
"Our greatest glory consists not in never falling, but in rising everytime we fall." - Confucius
Bellsouth Free Since 10/05 - To Hell With Bellsouth
Advocatus Diaboli | |
|
| | 
Vvian Kalyss
join:2003-10-14
Stage 5.0
clubs: | Re: Would seem pretty simple... "I'll fscking kill Google!"
 | |
|
| stufried
Premium
join:2003-10-13
 ·Verizon BroadbandA..
edit:
December 13th, @04:06PM
| Great idea! They own the wires, why shouldn't they be able to do with them as they please. In fact, I think we should extend the concept. I get my power from a local energy conglomerate DTE Energy.
I bet you they could engineer appliances with a chip that identifies itself to the appliance as a "DTE Energy approved" appliance. We could then implement a QOS style of routing of energy to it. On days of high energy useage and brown outs, my DTE Energy sold air conditioner can get power when my neighbor has to deal with a brown out.
DTE could justify this program in infrastructure improvement, but oops, how would they explain why we just created an incentive not to improve their energy disbursement for all. I guess I'll have to work on that one. | |
|
| | 
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA
 ·Comcast Formerly ..
| Re: Would seem pretty simple... Yeah--and then we could provide for "politically correct" and "politically incorrect" uses of electricity. People who, for example, challenged the local status quo could have their electricity downgraded.
Right after discriminatory classes of service based on destination IP comes discriminatory treatment based on message content, folks....
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! | |
|
| 
packetscan
Premium
join:2004-10-19
Bridgeport, CT
clubs: | My thoughts exactly! | |
|
| chemaupr
join:2005-06-06
Alexandria, VA |
IF I’m Google then I will chargeback to the BS and ATT to grant access to my content by each BS abd ATT user or hit…. | |
|
| odysseus4
join:2005-10-21
Raleigh, NC
| Everyone already pays for their access to the internet.
Why should this even be an issue? I'd have to agree, it does equate to digital extortion.
I fail to see why the company that has invested the money cannot create differnet level of services.
I can get dialup for $10 per month but to get better quality brought on by higher speed I must pay.
If there is no money to be made in building better networks, the carriers will put their money in CDs and the buildout will cease.
A better question is why you would stick up for the Googles and Yahoos and the millionaire founders who think that they should hawk their wares on the telephone company's dime.
If you do not want to pay for the higher quality network, do not use it. If you think the high quality cell phone system is an affront to the consumer, go use CB radio. You pay for better quality everywhere. It is the same thing. | |
|
| | chesney09
Premium
join:2004-07-26
Redford, MI
clubs:
| Re: Would seem pretty simple... You just completely contradicted yourself. We do pay for our bandwidth at the levels we are subscribed to...
Dial up.. You get slow service, dsl/cable, you get mainstream level of service, VDSL2 or Fios or dedicated cicuit... Better yet.
The Googles/yahoos.. pay for their access to the internet as well.. It costs them money each time someone access and uses their site. They pay for their dedicated circuits and usage...
You might want to look into how websites are hosted, ran, accessed, and the costs that go along with it all. | |
|
| TannMann
join:2001-10-21
Sacramento, CA
| If I'm reading this correctly and yes I understand it's an old post, I can't see why Bell South would want to force Google and others to pay for their services. For without Google and others being there to entertain us users and make life a little easier, there would be no service for BS to sell. The googles, ebays and other mega sites just puts icing on BS's cake/service making it more desirable for us to purchase. So if anything, Google is the one who should be collecting fees from BS!  | |
|
pokesph
It Is Almost Fast
join:2001-06-25
Sacramento, CA
clubs:
·Comcast
| telcos can you say greedy?
thats all it comes down to.. money-grubbing greed.
the internet is suppose to be an open, croos-platform, 'info highway' if these telcos have their way we'll all suffer as more and more providers take up this per usage bandwagon and web content owners/provider all are forced to pay or go completely off-line because they can't compete.
--
Webmaster Steve
- - - - - - - - - - - -
»ppnhosting.com
»sphenterprizes.com
»pokemonpalace.net | |
|
| 
JokerCPoC
join:2005-11-21
Yermo, CA | Re: telcos Yeah their greedy and stupid, So besides complain to Our elected members of Congress, State Governments and the FCC, What can We do?:( | |
|
| |
technick
Premium
join:2000-12-16
Loganville, GA
| Re: telcos said by JokerCPoC :Yeah their greedy and stupid, So besides complain to Our elected members of Congress, State Governments and the FCC, What can We do?:( Call everybody that works for Bellsouth...
»bellsouthcorp.com/newsroom/conta···c8ccc5cf
I am starting tomorrow.. who's with me?!?!?!?
--
"Our greatest glory consists not in never falling, but in rising everytime we fall." - Confucius
Bellsouth Free Since 10/05 - To Hell With Bellsouth
Advocatus Diaboli | |
|
| | |
JokerCPoC
join:2005-11-21
Yermo, CA | Re: telcos I live in verizon territory, sorry.:D | |
|
| | | | 
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Netcong, NJ
| Re: telcos said by JokerCPoC :I live in verizon territory, sorry.:D Don't worry, they'll jump on this ship as well.
--
enjoy zesty ranch man-flavored baby tacos responsibly | |
|
| | | jpark
join:2005-02-05
Jackson, TN
| said by technick :said by JokerCPoC :Yeah their greedy and stupid, So besides complain to Our elected members of Congress, State Governments and the FCC, What can We do?:( Call everybody that works for Bellsouth... » bellsouthcorp.com/newsroom/conta···c8ccc5cfI am starting tomorrow.. who's with me?!?!?!? Sorry. Calling everybody who works at BellSouth won't work. Just calling one person at BellSouth will probably consume about an hour to get through the automated routing and music on hold ... | |
|
| | | the dozer
Premium
join:2004-04-12
Douglasville, GA
| said by technick :said by JokerCPoC :Yeah their greedy and stupid, So besides complain to Our elected members of Congress, State Governments and the FCC, What can We do?:( Call everybody that works for Bellsouth... » bellsouthcorp.com/newsroom/conta···c8ccc5cfI am starting tomorrow.. who's with me?!?!?!? I'm sure they know who you are ... and I doubt you carry any weight with them.... | |
|
| | |
| | | 
EvilMoose
join:2003-02-26
Urbana, IL | Re: telcos Wishful thinking that Michael Powell will have a wardrobe malfunction? | |
|
| 
N10Cities
Is it quittin' time yet?
join:2002-05-07
Podunk, AR
clubs:
 ·World Lynx
·Cox HSI
| said by pokesph :can you say greedy? thats all it comes down to.. money-grubbing greed. the internet is suppose to be an open, croos-platform, 'info highway' if these telcos have their way we'll all suffer as more and more providers take up this per usage bandwagon and web content owners/provider all are forced to pay or go completely off-line because they can't compete. Exactly.....if the telcos want to shoot themselves in the foot and have the end-users saying 'Screw this....I don't need their service THAT bad...will just use it from work!' and then disconnect Internet service, then go ahead. | |
|
DaSneaky1D
Tell me, where is your father?
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou | The Internet use to be fun It's sad that the people who will side with this type of thinking are those that understand the impact of it the least.
--
:: my trivial ramblings :: | |
|
| NGOwner
join:2000-11-21
Leawood, KS
 ·LINGO
| Re: The Internet use to be fun I am one of those who believe that telcos and cablecos should be permitted to do what they suggest.
The prevailing thinking here at BBR is that the glass is half empty. Meaning, cablecos and telcos will take their existing products and make it worse.
Fact of the matter is TWC already does something similar. The Digital Phone product they offer is a dedicated, completely separate pipe from the RoadRunner Internet product TWC offers.
Perhaps that's what the telcos and cablecos ultimately want to do. Create an overlay network, or overlay datachannels, for those items or products or requests that get preferential treatment, either because it is offered by the cable/telco themselves, or the requestee has paid the cable/telco for preferential treatment. What you get today doesn't change, just that for some things your experience gets better.
Other industries have instituted preferential treatment programs for vendors and/or customers. For example, how is this any different from the institution of a frequent flier program for the airlines?
This doesn't have to be a bad thing.
[NG]Owner
--
It is impossible to create an idiot-proof product. Humanity is simply too adept at churning out better idiots. | |
|
| | 
TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: The Internet use to be fun said by NGOwner :I am one of those who believe that telcos and cablecos should be permitted to do what they suggest. I agree with you. What they are arguing is that other companies don't get a free ride on the EXTRA capabilities they build into their infrastructure. If they want to stick to the regular priority internet, then fine. But if they want expedited thruput then they pay extra. Comcast does this with their Digital Voice(sort of a prioritized VOIP). Now should every other VOIP vendor get the right to ride on Comcast's enhanced voice hardware without cost - I say not.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
My Web Page | |
|
| | | 
loadmaster
join:2001-01-10
San Jose, CA
| Re: The Internet use to be fun You have got to be kidding. We have no choice, it is either the bandwidth extorting phone companies or the bandwidth extorting cable companies. You can choose 1 or the other since there is only 1 phone and cable line going to each house. This is another reason that we need MUNI internet and phone access. | |
|
| | |
packetscan
Premium
join:2004-10-19
Bridgeport, CT
clubs: | I completely disagree..
This equates to extortion.
They knew what the internet was when they started to offer it.
I wonder is AL gore has anything to say about this.
--
Who do you want to pay off today? | |
|
| | | johnh123
join:2002-11-19
Chicago, IL
| Exactly- and I think what they are REALLY concerned about is tv. SBC will segregate their iptv traffic when they roll out Project Lightspeed. They don't want somebody else to say that they should be allowed to use that segregated bandwidth to offer a competing video service. Same thing with voice. They are saying that the segregated area is THEIRS, and if somebody else wants to use it, fine, but they'll have to pay for that privilege. This does not hurt the 'regular' internet at all. | |
|
| | | robscullion
Premium
join:2001-12-07
Philadelphia, PA
| Unfortunately, that probably means the "regular priority internet" will be deliberately stagnated while all improvements go into the new tiered side of the service. In the end, there's nothing usable left on the regular side and the new 2 tiered system becomes the defacto internet connection for the vast majority of high-bandwidth services. I'm talking about down the line a bit where we've got 50mbps as the standard on the tiered side while the regular side was left at 1.5mbps or maybe 3mbps.
While that's great for the ISPs and an obvious good business move, it's just not the right way to grow the internet. Since most last-mile providers are working through public right-of-ways, I don't feel it's wrong to forbid certain business practices which are, basically, monopolistic and detrimental to the public. In truth, a lot of the US is probably looking at a Verizon/Comcast duopoly in broadband/media/voice real soon now. Letting that duopoly become the gatekeeper for the internet is just a bad idea for everyone who's not Verizon or Comcast.
Some fair way of ensuring QoS does need to happen sometime soon. Right now, you purchase a last-mile pipe of a certain bandwidth and from there to the edge of the ISP network is basically best effort and varies greatly from ISP to ISP or even block to block (for cable). I obviously don't like the tiering idea. In a perfect world we'd have reasonable levels of QoS guaranteed to the edge of the ISPs network with the chance for the consumer to purchase a higher QoS pipe for a higher monthly price. That way the ISP could sell the QoS improvements without acting as a gatekeeper. I'd favor that solution since it maintains the basic open nature of the net as we know it. | |
|
| | | | johnh123
join:2002-11-19
Chicago, IL | Re: The Internet use to be fun Nooooooooooooooooo. The high bandwidth/priority pipe is for iptv and voip, basically. Web browsing would be done over the regular pipe. | |
|
| | | | | robscullion
Premium
join:2001-12-07
Philadelphia, PA
| Re: The Internet use to be fun From the article:
quote:
The companies could also charge websites a premium to offer their video to consumers on the higher-speed Internet. That could mean that a company like Yahoo might have to pay AT&T to send high-quality video to AT&T subscribers.
Maybe this is just an example of a writer mixing up the tech company itself with "the website", but it sounds like content from the Yahoo website would go over the premium tier whereas stuff from non-member sites would be over the regular link. So it sounds like internet traffic would be coming over this premium connection, which is the important point. It's not just serving up video inside their own network but providing a higher speed QoS pipe to the rest of the net.
But I wasn't really talking about browsing anyway. I'm talking about, I dunno, maybe FPS gaming on a level the size of a planet, or realtime file-sharing across the net or whatever the "next big thing" is that someone hits on to take advantage of a 50mpbs or bigger pipe. The "next big thing" part is where the real tragedy will lie. Where will the next great innovative net products come from when Verizon & Comcast get to decide what gets access to a fat pipe and what doesn't? Anything that could threaten their hegemony would be turned down. If you were Verizon and managed to get a law passed that said you could effectively shut Vonage out of FIOS, wouldn't you do so? It sounds like that's where all this is heading. | |
|
| | | | | | johnh123
join:2002-11-19
Chicago, IL | Re: The Internet use to be fun Reread that quote- they would charge a premium to offer video over the higher quality net. Video. Video. And we are not talking about video to your computer- we are talking video to your TV. That is what this is about- not web content. | |
|
| | | | | | | AquaBlaze
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| Re: The Internet use to be fun said by johnh123 :Reread that quote- they would charge a premium to offer video over the higher quality net. Video. Video. And we are not talking about video to your computer- we are talking video to your TV. That is what this is about- not web content. If that's the case, then why is it the TelCos' examples mainly consist of Google "using their lines for free"? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Google a web site, not a TV station? | |
|
| | | | | | | robscullion
Premium
join:2001-12-07
Philadelphia, PA
| john123, I have to disagree with your interpretation. NGOwner's (I think it was him/her) explanation elsewhere in this thread seemed closer to the actual plan. That interpretation was that, where a consumer had both standard broadband and IPTV service, they'd be selling excess bandwidth from the IPTV side for QoS guaranteed internet-based traffic. Once you have two pipes, both serving internet content, it'd only be natural for that bigger, better pipe to become the defacto primary connection and get all the speed/quality upgrades. Especially when you can squeeze $'s out of Yahoo/Google etc to transit that pipe.
It's not something I think will happen right away. But if the telecom act is re-written to allow them to sell access to internet content providers to that better pipe, it won't take more than a few years for us to arrive at the nightmare scenario everyone is discussing. | |
|
| | | | 
csspaa
join:2004-12-08
Belleville, MI | Qos is NOT AN IDEA it is a protocol, go to network properties. Quality of Service Packet, Oos Packets. | |
|
| | |
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Netcong, NJ
| said by TK Junk Mail :said by NGOwner :I am one of those who believe that telcos and cablecos should be permitted to do what they suggest. I agree with you. What they are arguing is that other companies don't get a free ride on the EXTRA capabilities they build into their infrastructure. If they want to stick to the regular priority internet, then fine. But if they want expedited thruput then they pay extra. It's very silly and I think they'll get a big surprise if they actually try this. Normal speeds are NOT an "extra capability". The content providers have already paid their ISPs to move their bits from their hosts to other hosts on the internet. SBC is trying to double-dip. Very expected from a telco (remember reciprocal compensation?) who would just love to bill by the bit. To these morons everything looks like a phone call.
If they really do this (although at this point I can only guess what "this" is) I imagine they'll find themselves cut off from a number of major backbones. That would be quite entertaining.
Perhaps they should also start charging a nickel to the sender of every email that enters their network.
Seems like a desperate move by a company that is selling at a loss to compete with cable to me.
--
enjoy zesty ranch man-flavored baby tacos responsibly | |
|
| | Cyron
join:2002-09-24
Charlotte, NC
| I think the main concern is that I pay for my connection and bandwidth. If the content provider has to pay (keep in mind they already pay a boatload for their own access) extra because I want to access their content, why should I be paying the same amount?
What if the majority of the content providers I access decide not to pay? Does that mean I'm over-paying for all that bandwidth?
I think the ISP's see it as an easy way to generate revenue without all the negative PR that comes from raising consumer prices. However, there won't be nearly as many free content providers if they have to start shelling out extra to every telco/cableco company. | |
|
| | |
See 7 replies to this post |
|
| |
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA
·Comcast Formerly ..
| said by NGOwner :... Fact of the matter is TWC already does something similar. The Digital Phone product they offer is a dedicated, completely separate pipe from the RoadRunner Internet product TWC offers. ... Completely separate pipe? So you mean they run a wire separate from the TV coax into your house? I don't think so.
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! | |
|
| | |
See 6 replies to this post |
|
TelecomJunky
Premium
join:2005-12-12
Kansas City, MO | Monopoly Already the rebirth of MaBell is having a negative impact on the once free and open Internet. And the regulators couldn't see this coming? | |
|
| 
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
edit:
December 13th, @02:08PM
| Re: Monopoly They have gotten everything they have asked for and more over the last few years. If this was a spoiled 7 year old we were talking about, I imagine they'd keep asking for more candy too until someone in Washington grew a pair of cojones and tweaked their nose.... | |
|
| | 
chiefeyes
join:2001-08-14
Thomaston, ME | Re: Monopoly Cojones ? In Washington?? I think not !!  | |
|
| Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| and all we can be is Sheep. Baah Baah Baah
because that letter to your congressman isnt as meaningfull as that check from AT&T that just bought him a new BMW X5 with all the trimmings including On-Star.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
|
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN
| They dropped the prices So they drop the prices so low they can't make the money they want off of their connections. Oh well. You can't start extorting every page on the internet for money because you screwed yourself. They have the ability to bundle, I say that's good enough. If they can't beat a competitors VoIP or ipTV price even if they bundle their services with the internet connection, then they have problems. And in the end, I think Bellsouth's biggest issue is that their slow dsl connections can't support adding these extra services without severely crippling the speed of the internet connection. | |
|
claco
join:2002-09-29
Tallmadge, OH
·AT&T DSL Service
| Wrong The telco justification is that since they're paying so much for upgrades, their traffic should clearly have higher priority in a two-tiered system.
Wrong! We, the users and tax payers are paying for the upgrades already through rate hikes and "fees". As such, I expect all my traffic to flow through the network I'm paying service for at the same rate.
Idiots. I hope Congress beats them with a clue-by-four. But I wouldn't bet on it.
--
Six of one, 1,426/2,852 dozen of the other. | |
|
DrewCapu
Giant Diehard
join:2001-12-19
California
clubs: | The end of the internet is coming Let's all go out and socialize | |
|
|
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN | Re: The end of the internet is coming said by DrewCapu :socialize Saaaaay whaaaaaaatttt? | |
|
OldMan3333
@bcvloh.ameritech | How far we've come I can remember in the good ol' days where ads on the www were taboo...
I dont see how google could be held accountable for the fact that I want to view their web site. | |
|
Wireless Major
@199.72.x.x
 from:
Vvian Kalyss
| BS I think this analogy fits best:
Car manufacturer: Third Party content provider
Car = content
Driver = subscriber/User
Toll Road = iNET Pipe
Bellsouth, AT&T: "We're building a bigger toll road, AND we want to become a car manufacturer. We think its unfair that these other car manufacturers have cars traveling on our toll road without paying us money...and this situation is a threat to our wanting to become a car manufacturer. Never mind the fact that we charge the Driver of these cars a good chunk of change to use our tollway, because that is irrelevant.
Our new toll road is going to be 40 lanes wide, and because it cost us alot of money to build this new toll road, but more specifically, because we want to become a car manufacturer, we want to relegate Drivers who's Car manufacturer doesn't pay us tribute, to only be able to use 10 of the toll road lanes. We are doing this because our current efforts as a car manufacturer producing cars is very lackluster. Nobody wants to buy a 150HP car from us when they can go to another car manufacturer and buy a 200-500HP car for the same price, or in some cases, be able to get the car for free! Its an outrage! We wont be able to force the Drivers to use our cars if we allow the other car manufacturers to continue to be able to sell their cars to the Drivers, and not pay use tribute money that gets passed on to the Driver.
So this is the new plan we want: We want to build out new 40lane toll road. And of course we're going to charge the Driver an arm and a leg. Then, we're gonna charge the other car manufacturers tribute money to be able to use the reserved 30 lanes of the toll road, because if they want the Drivers to have a good driving experience, then the Drivers will need to drive the car on the reserved 30 lanes, where we can "guarantee" the quality of the experience, instead of being relegated to the 10 lanes. If the other car manufacturers refuse to pay tribute, then the Driver can only use their cars on the other 10 lanes...and we can't "guarantee" the driving experience once on those 10 lanes.
Also, this is why we're against the building of independant building of tollroads, because those tollroads could possibly offer just as good or a better driving experience, and possible lower fees for the Driver, and we just can't have that."
I think that sums it up the best. | |
|
richardpor
Fur it up
join:2003-04-19
Portland, OR
| I am Starting To See Telo Point. No it is too early to drink. I used to hold that the telcos are greedy but i beginning to see their point as a valid argument. The issue is the behavior of Google and other tech firms stretch the limits of computer power and network speed by their applications. I get the idea that the Google rocket scientist do not give a rat ass about the how their application might overload the Telco’s network and only care about the gee wiz factor.
For example Google buys out Bit torrent and creates Google torrent. Thousands of users start using Google torrent to download the latest Britney Spears Porn video. As a result the telcos get a torrent of calls by angry users wanting to know why my connection is slow. Because it is goggle's application that is causing the problem, then in this case Goggle should pay-up or shut up. | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | Great... I give a politician money in exchange for favors and it's a bribe...I go to jail.
Telcos do it and it's lobbying.
--
WAR HAS NEVER SOLVED ANYTHING, except ending slavery, facism, communism, Nazism.... | |
|
| Cyron
join:2002-09-24
Charlotte, NC
| Re: Great... Actually, they give the money to a campaign fund that is only supposed to be used for campaigning 
The real bribery comes when the congressman loses the election or decides to leave office and gets a fat paying job from one of the lobbying company's. | |
|
Cyber2lz
join:2001-11-15
Odessa, FL
 ·Verizon FIOS
·RoadRunner Cable
| Mr. Smith goes to Washington If Bill gets his way and BS rolls out a two tier Internet, I predict a mass exodus to ANY other form of internet delivery by those who do not want to pay more or have their non-ilec packets slowed down. Mr. Smith is then going to wind up with the same type of users that are plaguing the POTS network now. Low margin, clueless technophobes that simply want the least expensive broadband they can get for email and surfing.
Just a thought, | |
|
| tel601
join:2005-08-11
Picayune, MS
| Re: Mr. Smith goes to Washington Everyone jumps on Bellsouth's case about this when this has been going on in other forms for years, by both cable and telcos alike. When a new technology comes out do you see it in the older parts of town first, no. You see it in some new high dollar subdivision on the edge of town. When a cable company rebuilds a node where are they more likely to lower the number of subs per a node at; in the lower class neighborhoods where there is a higher sub turnover rate or in the up scale neighborhoods with a lower turnover rate. It is the same with adsl, the telcos are more likely to turn up a dslam in a up scale neighborhood because here they know they can obtain and keep more subs on the service. Even when many companies expand their backbone network it tends to be built to support the newer areas of growth, leaving the old areas behind in the process. Also many ISP's have limiting data flow on certain ports of their subscribers for some time, that is a very similar thing, just they are not making money off of it. There is another question that still begs to be answered, what will the profit from the money be used for? If it is used to lower the cost of broadband will also increasing the speed of the service this would help keep many who just use the internet for basic surfing. A change in routing would be hard to notice in some internet apps, it will take one that is time sensitive or with heavy data flow to show the difference, and in these two areas many of the cable and telco ISP's already have issues. | |
|
rudnicke
Premium
join:2004-10-23
Rantoul, IL
clubs: | Greed at it's finest. | |
|
MattE
Obama '08
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC | Stupid stuff... ....like this is why I am proud to be -- Bellsouth free -- since 2003. | |
|
IRN00b
@comcast.n
from:
Vvian Kalyss
| Where did all the smart people go? That's really the dumbest thing I have ever heard of since said traffic is only on their lines because their paying customers are accessing it. It's not like Google just sends us random search results at will.
DUH!!
[RANT]
The world seems to be full of these thoughtless idiots and sadly many of them are in control of something, how did all that happen? It's really sad that Americans are more worried about what someone may have smoked on their own personal than having someone with such a low intellect running their company. If you ask me they need to spend more money on IQ tests than drug tests, this guy obviously wouldn't score too high.
[/RANT] | |
|
r81984
Tough to beat.
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Morgan City, LA
·Insight Communicat..
·AT&T Midwest
edit:
December 13th, @02:45PM
| Block Bell South If Bell South does this, then maybe every search engine and website should block Bell South customers from accessing their web pages in protest until Bell South stops this.
Or
Google can limit the bandwidth Bell South uses, so if a BS user buys the better tier they will still get slow speeds with google.
This is just going to turn into a big war that just hurts customers! | |
|
TechSponge
join:2001-05-14
Hillside, NJ |  Exactly why....
| |
|
| |
hmmmm......