33 ms·
I pay about $50 a month for internet, and none of that goes to the creators. The ISP transmits the bits but profits from others creating something that makes me
by 205guy 6y ago
I pay about $50 a month for internet, and none of that goes to the creators. The ISP transmits the bits but profits from others creating something that makes me want to be connected.
My idea: ISPs become regulated like utilities (fixed rate subject to public utilities commission), there is some flat fee for service and then a content fee that gets divided up based on what you consume and paid to the originating IP address. Figure out some categories of content (audio, video, image, text), enforce something that prevents inflating of bits, and then everyone gets paid based on their content. My blog earns a few pennies a day and my account with my hosting provider gets credited monthly or something—which offsets my hosting bill. A YouTube channel gets paid to YouTube who take a cut for providing the severs and the rest passed on. Software and hardware for self-hosting becomes a thing again.
- adwn 6y ago> Figure out some categories of content (audio, video, image, text), enforce something that prevents inflating of bits, and then everyone gets paid based on their content. So. much. handwaving. And there are so many ways this will be gamed by so many parties.
- TheCapeGreek 6y agoWon't that pave the way to the very thing everyone got up in arms about net neutrality for? Having to pay more for certain types of traffic or to certain websites. If your ISP is supposed to forward on some funds to certain types of content then you'll bet they'll add packages and throttle bandwidth for certain content unless you pay extra. Regulation clearly won't help in the US any many parts of the world if ISPs have that kind of leeway, even if "regulated".
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]