6 ms·

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.

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.
    - Spivak 7y ago
      > then they have no business offering it! Okay so the advertising changes to be from "X speed" to "best effort capped at X speed" -- nothing about internet service actually changes -- you're probably still mad. I feel like in a technical forum we should know better that such guarantees are impossible on any shared medium, not just oversubscribed ones. > Charging more to, or placing time restrictions on, certain classes of customers who consume large quantities is a key part of that strategy. You mean like how large ISPs want to throttle and charge video services more? > water utility also doesn't charge a different rate depending on whether you're using the kitchen vs bathroom Your water utility might not but your electric company does in certain areas buy putting special meters on your large appliances. It's typically done for a discount to incentivize running them off-peak but the idea is the same. > doesn't attempt to collect and then sell such data to third parties Careful with that assumption, that's exactly what the smart meters are for that are currently being rolled out.
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?

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.
  - Spivak 7y ago
    > then they have no business offering it! Okay so the advertising changes to be from "X speed" to "best effort capped at X speed" -- nothing about internet service actually changes -- you're probably still mad. I feel like in a technical forum we should know better that such guarantees are impossible on any shared medium, not just oversubscribed ones. > Charging more to, or placing time restrictions on, certain classes of customers who consume large quantities is a key part of that strategy. You mean like how large ISPs want to throttle and charge video services more? > water utility also doesn't charge a different rate depending on whether you're using the kitchen vs bathroom Your water utility might not but your electric company does in certain areas buy putting special meters on your large appliances. It's typically done for a discount to incentivize running them off-peak but the idea is the same. > doesn't attempt to collect and then sell such data to third parties Careful with that assumption, that's exactly what the smart meters are for that are currently being rolled out.

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?