It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Charging by the Byte To Curb Internet Traffic: NY Times

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Charging by the Byte To Curb Internet Traffic: NY Times


www.nytimes.com

Some people use the Internet simply to check e-mail and look up phone numbers. Others are online all day, downloading big video and music files.

For years, both kinds of Web surfers have paid the same price for access. But now three of the country’s largest Internet service providers are threatening to clamp down on their most active subscribers by placing monthly limits on their online activity.

One of them, Time Warner Cable, began a trial of “Internet metering” in one Texas city early this month, asking customers to select a monthly plan and pay surcharges when they exceed their bandwidth limit. The idea is that people who use the network more heavily should pay more, the way they do for water, electricity, or, in many cases, cellphone minutes.

(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 14-6-2008 by DimensionalDetective]




posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 05:44 PM
link   
Well, if you can't censor the net, maybe you can just keep people from accessing info by making it TOO COSTLY for them to surf...Perfect timing for them to introduce this, when everyone is struggling to make ends meet. Coincidence? You be the judge...


That same week, Comcast said that it would expand on a strategy it uses to manage Internet traffic: slowing down the connections of the heaviest users, so-called bandwidth hogs, at peak times.

AT&T also said Thursday that limits on heavy use were inevitable and that it was considering pricing based on data volume. “Based on current trends, total bandwidth in the AT&T network will increase by four times over the next three years,” the company said in a statement.

All three companies say that placing caps on broadband use will ensure fair access for all users.




www.nytimes.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 14-6-2008 by DimensionalDetective]



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 05:53 PM
link   
NEW Link fix

So.... back to the dark ages internet wise. This is appalling and a bad excuse for making more money. Damn greedy geeks!

They really shouldn't have an argument since they went from this model when it all began, then onto fiber optics and easy cheap internet which could handle more and now.... back to paying up.


I gotta start reading those news completely

20gig cap... That's not too bad in my opinion. If you get "free" surf within those and for that price I'm still safe.
But I can see the problems for those who are into sucking down hard on the bandwidth. Just remember that many of the movies / tv aren't that big in size from the beginning. So it will still take some time to reach the top.

One thing that annoyed me though; how the hell can they justify comparing this to the usage of water and electricity. Those things are natural resources we're using so of course we should pay. The internet can hardly be put under that category.

[edit on 14/6/08 by flice]

[edit on 14/6/08 by flice]



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 05:55 PM
link   
your link is dead.

Here in Australia we pay for speed and a download limit per month anyway. If you exceed your limit, your internet gets slowed. (throttled)



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 05:59 PM
link   
I wonder how much influence the ISP's have in in the current threat to ban P2P usage?
I'll bet it's not just the record and film companies.
The ISP's are charging a fortune for internet service, the least they can do is upgrade their infrastructure, but, that eats into their profit margin.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 06:10 PM
link   
im a time warner cable net subscriber and if they try this here in ny il cancel my net subscripton. i pay for broadband unlimeted internet . thats what i signed my name to and thats what ill pay for they try and cap my use and not only will i cancel my service ill protest. this is complete and utter greed. i dont down load movies or music files very ofton but i down load a hell of a lot of books . and if there goona penalise me for using the internet as it was intended as a source of information ill fight it .



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Someone else above mentioned bandwidth throttling. If their true concern is bandwidth use, it seems to me that throttling it would reduce bandwidth use more than allowing people to pay more to keep using the same amount of bandwidth. It makes me highly suspicious that they just want to make more money.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 06:25 PM
link   
This is off topic but bad enough you have to pay 50 cents in to use a public bathroom in nyc.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by AceWombat04
 


There are still pay per MB once limit reached internet plans here. But most people get the throttled plans. Generally throttled to 64kb speed making it near impossible to download.
There are unlimited plans but most have a fair use policy and they cost a lot.
We are ripped off here in Australia for crap speed vs. cost.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 06:33 PM
link   
I wasn't saying anything good or bad about throttling in general. I just meant that if the ISPs here are really worried about people using excessive bandwidth (which is what they say their rationale for this new pay plan is,) it doesn't make sense to me that they will allow people to pay more for using the same amount of bandwidth. It would make more sense to me for them to throttle everyone's bandwidth beyond a certain limit. That way only those using beyond a certain amount of bandwidth would be penalized, and more bandwidth would be conserved. Paying for more just means people will pay more (if they can afford it of course) for the same service essentially, in my opinion.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 06:41 PM
link   
Example when roadrunner first came out their download bandwidth was 1.5 megs then after a few years they jumped to 3 then 5.Now its just greedy is right to charge by byte.Just like telephone now with unlimited calling.What they going to charge per call now?



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 06:45 PM
link   
All this comes down to in the end is;
The NWO is on its way folks and it is maddning as hell to know it and see it everyday coming closer and closer and no one will listen and there appears to be no way out aside from an outside intervention of some sort.
This is mearly another step closer to what we all know is coming.
At this point I am done with the idea that we are somehow going to wake enough people up to turn this boat around. It is inevitable and I wish it would just happen already. It saddens me to no end that our humanity is being taken from us willingly and we are all complicate in our own downfall. This is another nail in the coffin.

Long live George W. Bush.
My allegiance is without measure and I pray that your enemies both foreign and domestic be smitten by our lord Lucifer. May his name live forever and his power reign supreme over all the land.
(end sarcasm)



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by AceWombat04
 


I agree to what you say, and if you guys can fight these internet companies to get more money out of you, you should.
fyi - throttling sucks

[edit on 14-6-2008 by leearco]



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join