Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Worsel

(7 posts)
22. two different things
Thu May 15, 2014, 11:06 AM
May 2014

I don't conflate usage billing with net neutrality. Net neutrality should be maintained. Usage based billing is probably inevitable.

I retired from a phone company. Ten years ago I ran across a white paper discussing South Korean Internet provisioning and usage based billing. Their present was reflecting our future. Everybody already had broadband in South Korea back then. No more customers to get, only poaching from competitors; consumers demanding more and faster streaming driving costly provisioning expenses. With no new customers it's either having data brownouts or raising bills for everybody or going to tiered billing.

Streaming downloads 7x24 is the equivalent of permanently opening all of your water taps in your house. Why do we have water meters? Bandwidth isn't infinite. Power users should pay more after a certain point or everyone is going to pay more. Your neighbors can be affecting your response just like they could affect your water pressure if they all flushed their toilets at the same time.

And no, I don't love TWC cable. Just got my bill yesterday. It went up $16 a month with no warning after going up $8 three months ago. If we'd elect more progressives maybe we'd have PUCOs that would protect consumers again. But, tiered billing is inevitable even if we reign in the greed.



Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

UGH. K&R for info. Jefferson23 May 2014 #1
The final nail in your coffin is restricted access to accurate information randys1 May 2014 #2
Absolutely....... Swede Atlanta May 2014 #4
That would be good. Ed Suspicious May 2014 #5
Than an OCCUPY woman guilty of moving her arm is in prison and militia murderers are free to roam randys1 May 2014 #6
Time to add a technology split seabeckind May 2014 #8
How about a second , open source internet backbone built by the commons for the commons? Ed Suspicious May 2014 #3
I don't think the backbone is the problem. mwooldri May 2014 #20
We need something like the Rural Electrification Program Beartracks May 2014 #29
Another modern dinosaur seabeckind May 2014 #7
Fucking monopolies. SamKnause May 2014 #9
Another good reason for a public internet service through the USPS. Scuba May 2014 #10
+ Ed Suspicious May 2014 #11
I'd like this option Liberalynn May 2014 #14
GOPers would never allow that to happen ..... groundloop May 2014 #21
I guess Comcast sulphurdunn May 2014 #12
Cohen is a money grubbing asshole and a liar. blackspade May 2014 #13
Time to break the monopoly - TBF May 2014 #15
Monopolies are no longer a priority. Enthusiast May 2014 #26
This is Comcast's first move to protect their cable holdings. AtheistCrusader May 2014 #16
The last time I called Comcast to discuss rates... Orrex May 2014 #17
The consumer is the corporations enemy. santamargarita May 2014 #18
Share traders are where the money is made, I guess. Ed Suspicious May 2014 #19
two different things Worsel May 2014 #22
I must disagree. phazed May 2014 #28
you two provide excellent reading Skittles May 2014 #32
Computer repair business... out of business. phazed May 2014 #23
Google Fiber workinclasszero May 2014 #24
That's not a solution. Chan790 May 2014 #30
Kick.... daleanime May 2014 #25
That day is already here mbuch64 May 2014 #27
This should maybe be posted in the bad reads forum? nt BootinUp May 2014 #31
Latest Discussions»Editorials & Other Articles»Comcast: Usage-Based Bill...»Reply #22