3 ms·
I think this the fundamental problem: so few people have any idea how the internet works. Sending packets is nothing like consuming water. The marginal cost of
by lordCarbonFiber 9y ago
I think this the fundamental problem: so few people have any idea how the internet works. Sending packets is nothing like consuming water. The marginal cost of internet use is 0. But, because all you can get across to people is "series of tubes" the ISPs make out like criminals charging for for bits.
With any luck the next generation will look at bandwidth caps the same way young people today are shocked anyone was so stupid as to allow companies to charge per SMS message.
- mikeash 9y agoThe marginal cost is zero until you hit capacity, and then the marginal cost of the next bit is millions or billions of dollars. Then it goes back to zero until you hit the upgraded capacity, rinse and repeat. This is a pretty common situation in many areas. The marginal cost of putting a package on a truck is nearly zero (there's a very, very small amount of extra fuel burned) until the truck is full, then the marginal cost of the next package is the cost of sending another truck. The marginal cost of putting another passenger on an airliner is nearly zero (again, there's a small amount of added fuel consumption) until you hit capacity, then it's suddenly huge. In these other areas, we generally look at the cost as being the marginal cost of the whole truck or plane divided by the number of things it carries, rather than assigning the entire cost to the one thing that requires a new truck or plane. I don't see why internet access shouldn't be like this too. Data costs should be pretty low, and should be much cheaper at off-peak hours, but I don't see why they should be zero.