5 ms·

ISP are becoming annoying middle man who want to make money from any data they can get their hands on. What eventually needs to be done is we classify ISPs as u

ISP are becoming annoying middle man who want to make money from any data they can get their hands on. What eventually needs to be done is we classify ISPs as utility. Example - your water supplier doesn't make a big deal if you use more water because you have a swimming pool but you ISP does and I find that very weird.

CondensedBrain 7y ago
Water companies do charge different rates depending on type of usage. Look up your local company's page to see the commercial rate. It could be higher or lower. They all seem to have different priorities based on a quick search of different cities.
- akshayB 7y ago
  maybe I didn't choose the best example but they don't throttle your water supplies.
  - ceejayoz 7y ago
    Well, until they run out entirely. https://time.com/4017476/a-town-without-water/ https://time.com/4017476/a-town-without-water/
  - Spivak 7y ago
    But water usage is absolutely throttled based on usage when there's a drought. I mean the police rather than the pipes is the enforcement mechanism but you will definitely be fined for using more water than necessary to water your lawn. I think we can all imagine examples where this would get scummy but using network management to in good-faith give a better experience to everyone isn't really what people should be worried about. I feel like the ISP throttling debate needs to be taken out of the realm of hackers where the mentality is "being allowed to do X is logically equivalent to being allowed to do X unrestricted for any purpose whatsoever" and into human territory where intent matters.
    - randallsquared 7y ago
      > the ISP throttling debate needs to be taken out of the realm of hackers where the mentality is "being allowed to do X is logically equivalent to being allowed to do X unrestricted for any purpose whatsoever" and into human territory where intent matters. When an ISP offers “unlimited” usage that does not allow 100% usage all month long, that is exactly what they are attempting to do: take the debate out of the realm of consistency, and into human territory where how someone feels about it is what matters, rather than what was apparently agreed.
      - Spivak 7y ago
        100% usage of what though? I feel like it's like complaining to the city because I can't drive the speed limit 100% of the time. Look, I agree with you that the marketing for internet packages desperately needs to be changed from "X Mbps" to "Capped at X Mbps bandwidth" but we're in a technical forum where we all ought to know better. And any ISP that uses their ability to throttle for a competitive advantage for competing services deserve to be raked over the coals but there are situations where throttling specific services makes everyone better off. The example I always use is throttling HBO traffic when GoT episodes are released -- watchers buffer a little longer but otherwise it's largely imperceptible and then non-GoT traffic isn't crowded out and you can livetweet the episode. I know that technical people here can do their own traffic shaping and probably don't want their ISP doing it for them but for people who just want working internet it's a huge improvement. Gone are the days of people's internet being slow because someone's hogging all the bandwidth watching YouTube.
        randallsquared 7y ago
        I don’t think we disagree on specifics.
    - Reelin 7y ago
      > ... using network management to in good-faith give a better experience to everyone ... But that's very much NOT what is going on these days (in the US at least). Providers advertise a plan at a certain speed with "unlimited" usage. By any reasonable interpretation, that would mean I could use up to that rate of transfer 24/7. If they can't provide that rate of transfer to everyone who purchases it, then they have no business offering it! And that's not even beginning to touch on any of the issues surrounding net neutrality. I suspect what happens is that due to competitive pressures (ie advertising a larger number to get more customers) they either oversell the network's capacity or they sell at prices that aren't actually profitable for them in the event that people actually use all of what was sold to them. To get back to the original analogy: > Example - your water supplier doesn't make a big deal if you use more water because you have a swimming pool but you ISP does and I find that very weird. In reality, your water supplier generally doesn't oversell their capacity - utilities go to great lengths to be able to meet peak demand. Charging more to, or placing time restrictions on, certain classes of customers who consume large quantities is a key part of that strategy. They also (typically) charge per gallon, which would be equivalent to charging per Gigabyte or whatever, but the rates are very reasonable. This is in addition to charging a low, again reasonable, fixed fee for your connection to their "network". Your water utility also doesn't charge a different rate depending on whether you're using the kitchen vs bathroom sink (net neutrality), and most certainly doesn't attempt to collect and then sell such data to third parties! tl;dr - ISPs in the US often engage in false advertising, resulting in outrage when promises aren't met. If they behaved more like actual utilities, we likely wouldn't have these issues.
- bduerst 7y ago
  Because water is a tangible, physical natural resource, unlike bandwidth, and billing by zoning helps prevent environmental tragedy of the commons.
  - wuliwong 7y ago
    I'm not sure what your definition of tangible, physical resource is but bandwidth is limited and measurable.
    - CondensedBrain 7y ago
      Remember the good old days when a few people on your street maxing out their connections could saturate the cable node? Even better if they figured out how to uncap their connection temporarily. They still could, but usage limits with charges past that at least discourage the behavior. People get the idea that internet is some magic, ephemeral source of endless data transfer. But it's very much a physical thing with limits set by the quality of the lines and the hardware at each end. Improving last-mile connections only push the limit upstream.
      - wbl 7y ago
        Most usage for a residential ISP will be during the evening. It should be possible to incentive moving bulk transfers to other times.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
    - bduerst 7y ago
      How does being measurable make it the same as a natural resource?
tuespetre 7y ago
Where I live, we have summer water restrictions. We also have a 12-month running average of usage on our bill, and whatever portion of our expected usage we exceed, we pay extra on.
akshayB 7y ago
Also utilities can be easily regulated even at county level or state level, services (ISPs) can't
zip1234 7y ago
Do they even need to be classified as utilities? It seems like there should just be some rules that they have to follow if they use public right of ways for wires. A utility brings with it other baggage that might not be applicable to an ISP.
- inetknght 7y ago
  Rules... like being neutral to customer data on the network?
- akshayB 7y ago
  Yeah there needs to be some sort of rules if they are not classified as utilities. I don't want a doctor's office to get shitty internet when doing video conferencing other doctors for opinion while a millionair's kids on same street is hogging all bandwidth by paying a premium to IPS for this gaming console.
  - inetknght 7y ago
    That sounds like market forces at work honestly. Doctor wants to skimp on internet needs better technical staff to determine the cause of any technical issues or charge customers more for the better care that comes with better internet.
fxprq 7y ago
Where I live I pay much more for every m3 if I use more than X m3 of water.
w8vY7ER 7y ago
Agreed, I think this would be in the general best interest for all customers.

CondensedBrain 7y ago

Water companies do charge different rates depending on type of usage. Look up your local company's page to see the commercial rate. It could be higher or lower. They all seem to have different priorities based on a quick search of different cities.

akshayB 7y ago
maybe I didn't choose the best example but they don't throttle your water supplies.
- ceejayoz 7y ago
  Well, until they run out entirely. https://time.com/4017476/a-town-without-water/ https://time.com/4017476/a-town-without-water/
- Spivak 7y ago
  But water usage is absolutely throttled based on usage when there's a drought. I mean the police rather than the pipes is the enforcement mechanism but you will definitely be fined for using more water than necessary to water your lawn. I think we can all imagine examples where this would get scummy but using network management to in good-faith give a better experience to everyone isn't really what people should be worried about. I feel like the ISP throttling debate needs to be taken out of the realm of hackers where the mentality is "being allowed to do X is logically equivalent to being allowed to do X unrestricted for any purpose whatsoever" and into human territory where intent matters.
  - randallsquared 7y ago
    > the ISP throttling debate needs to be taken out of the realm of hackers where the mentality is "being allowed to do X is logically equivalent to being allowed to do X unrestricted for any purpose whatsoever" and into human territory where intent matters. When an ISP offers “unlimited” usage that does not allow 100% usage all month long, that is exactly what they are attempting to do: take the debate out of the realm of consistency, and into human territory where how someone feels about it is what matters, rather than what was apparently agreed.
    - Spivak 7y ago
      100% usage of what though? I feel like it's like complaining to the city because I can't drive the speed limit 100% of the time. Look, I agree with you that the marketing for internet packages desperately needs to be changed from "X Mbps" to "Capped at X Mbps bandwidth" but we're in a technical forum where we all ought to know better. And any ISP that uses their ability to throttle for a competitive advantage for competing services deserve to be raked over the coals but there are situations where throttling specific services makes everyone better off. The example I always use is throttling HBO traffic when GoT episodes are released -- watchers buffer a little longer but otherwise it's largely imperceptible and then non-GoT traffic isn't crowded out and you can livetweet the episode. I know that technical people here can do their own traffic shaping and probably don't want their ISP doing it for them but for people who just want working internet it's a huge improvement. Gone are the days of people's internet being slow because someone's hogging all the bandwidth watching YouTube.
      - randallsquared 7y ago
        I don’t think we disagree on specifics.
  - Reelin 7y ago
    > ... using network management to in good-faith give a better experience to everyone ... But that's very much NOT what is going on these days (in the US at least). Providers advertise a plan at a certain speed with "unlimited" usage. By any reasonable interpretation, that would mean I could use up to that rate of transfer 24/7. If they can't provide that rate of transfer to everyone who purchases it, then they have no business offering it! And that's not even beginning to touch on any of the issues surrounding net neutrality. I suspect what happens is that due to competitive pressures (ie advertising a larger number to get more customers) they either oversell the network's capacity or they sell at prices that aren't actually profitable for them in the event that people actually use all of what was sold to them. To get back to the original analogy: > Example - your water supplier doesn't make a big deal if you use more water because you have a swimming pool but you ISP does and I find that very weird. In reality, your water supplier generally doesn't oversell their capacity - utilities go to great lengths to be able to meet peak demand. Charging more to, or placing time restrictions on, certain classes of customers who consume large quantities is a key part of that strategy. They also (typically) charge per gallon, which would be equivalent to charging per Gigabyte or whatever, but the rates are very reasonable. This is in addition to charging a low, again reasonable, fixed fee for your connection to their "network". Your water utility also doesn't charge a different rate depending on whether you're using the kitchen vs bathroom sink (net neutrality), and most certainly doesn't attempt to collect and then sell such data to third parties! tl;dr - ISPs in the US often engage in false advertising, resulting in outrage when promises aren't met. If they behaved more like actual utilities, we likely wouldn't have these issues.
bduerst 7y ago
Because water is a tangible, physical natural resource, unlike bandwidth, and billing by zoning helps prevent environmental tragedy of the commons.
- wuliwong 7y ago
  I'm not sure what your definition of tangible, physical resource is but bandwidth is limited and measurable.
  - CondensedBrain 7y ago
    Remember the good old days when a few people on your street maxing out their connections could saturate the cable node? Even better if they figured out how to uncap their connection temporarily. They still could, but usage limits with charges past that at least discourage the behavior. People get the idea that internet is some magic, ephemeral source of endless data transfer. But it's very much a physical thing with limits set by the quality of the lines and the hardware at each end. Improving last-mile connections only push the limit upstream.
    - wbl 7y ago
      Most usage for a residential ISP will be during the evening. It should be possible to incentive moving bulk transfers to other times.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - bduerst 7y ago
    How does being measurable make it the same as a natural resource?

tuespetre 7y ago

Where I live, we have summer water restrictions. We also have a 12-month running average of usage on our bill, and whatever portion of our expected usage we exceed, we pay extra on.

akshayB 7y ago

Also utilities can be easily regulated even at county level or state level, services (ISPs) can't

zip1234 7y ago

Do they even need to be classified as utilities? It seems like there should just be some rules that they have to follow if they use public right of ways for wires. A utility brings with it other baggage that might not be applicable to an ISP.

inetknght 7y ago
Rules... like being neutral to customer data on the network?
akshayB 7y ago
Yeah there needs to be some sort of rules if they are not classified as utilities. I don't want a doctor's office to get shitty internet when doing video conferencing other doctors for opinion while a millionair's kids on same street is hogging all bandwidth by paying a premium to IPS for this gaming console.
- inetknght 7y ago
  That sounds like market forces at work honestly. Doctor wants to skimp on internet needs better technical staff to determine the cause of any technical issues or charge customers more for the better care that comes with better internet.

fxprq 7y ago

Where I live I pay much more for every m3 if I use more than X m3 of water.

w8vY7ER 7y ago

Agreed, I think this would be in the general best interest for all customers.