5 ms·

Funnily my ISP was actually selling Helium hotspots themselves. :)

mcculley 4y ago
I have long thought that ISPs should charge by bandwidth used. It would incentivize improving infrastructure. Any ISP that would charge by bandwidth used would want their customers reselling bandwidth.
- bauruine 4y ago
  >It would incentivize improving infrastructure No it wouldn't. The actual usage has a negligible impact on the expenses for infrastructure. Most people barely use any bandwidth anyway. Even on 1 Gbit/s lines the average bandwidth used is in the single digit Mbit/s. And the usage basically doesn't differ if they have a 100Mbit/s or 10Gbit/s connection. Also those countries where data caps are still a thing are generally those with the worst Internet.
  - mcculley 4y ago
    The usage in Switzerland, South Korea, and other developed countries is very different. They use the bandwidth available. Netflix and YouTube show us that many people want more bandwidth. There would be no data caps if paying for bandwidth consumed.
    - bauruine 4y ago
      I work for an ISP in Switzerland. If you download a game you use 1Gbit/s+ for a few minutes instead of an hour or two. The average bandwidth used stays the same. Both don't require a lot of bandwidth and you have caches for their content. You can buy additional data if you've used your included data. That's basically the same.
      - mcculley 4y ago
        Paying for bandwidth used is exactly what I am talking about. In less developed places, 1Gbit/s is simply unavailable and usage is capped. There is no economic incentive to build better infrastructure for applications that do require a lot of bandwidth (e.g., Netflix).
- bmitc 4y ago
  > It would incentivize improving infrastructure. How? That doesn't seem to work in any industry that is close to being a utility. Just look at toll roads.
  - mcculley 4y ago
    The utility from which I buy electricity charges me per kWh consumed. They earn more revenue when I use more electricity. If they charged a flat $100 per month like my ISP, they would, like my ISP, cap my usage.
    - nottorp 4y ago
      However, most of the cost is producing those kWh and it's linear with kWh produced, while an ISP's costs are about fixed per household...
      - mcculley 4y ago
        That’s a chicken and egg situation. The costs are fixed because they have no incentive to build more infrastructure. If you live in a place with only one or two ISPs and they only charge a flat rate per month for capped usage, you never get more bandwidth. The system is working as designed.
        nottorp 4y ago
        The real fix is to take down some barriers to entry for new ISPs ;)

I have long thought that ISPs should charge by bandwidth used. It would incentivize improving infrastructure. Any ISP that would charge by bandwidth used would want their customers reselling bandwidth.

bauruine 4y ago
>It would incentivize improving infrastructure No it wouldn't. The actual usage has a negligible impact on the expenses for infrastructure. Most people barely use any bandwidth anyway. Even on 1 Gbit/s lines the average bandwidth used is in the single digit Mbit/s. And the usage basically doesn't differ if they have a 100Mbit/s or 10Gbit/s connection. Also those countries where data caps are still a thing are generally those with the worst Internet.
- mcculley 4y ago
  The usage in Switzerland, South Korea, and other developed countries is very different. They use the bandwidth available. Netflix and YouTube show us that many people want more bandwidth. There would be no data caps if paying for bandwidth consumed.
  - bauruine 4y ago
    I work for an ISP in Switzerland. If you download a game you use 1Gbit/s+ for a few minutes instead of an hour or two. The average bandwidth used stays the same. Both don't require a lot of bandwidth and you have caches for their content. You can buy additional data if you've used your included data. That's basically the same.
    - mcculley 4y ago
      Paying for bandwidth used is exactly what I am talking about. In less developed places, 1Gbit/s is simply unavailable and usage is capped. There is no economic incentive to build better infrastructure for applications that do require a lot of bandwidth (e.g., Netflix).
bmitc 4y ago
> It would incentivize improving infrastructure. How? That doesn't seem to work in any industry that is close to being a utility. Just look at toll roads.
- mcculley 4y ago
  The utility from which I buy electricity charges me per kWh consumed. They earn more revenue when I use more electricity. If they charged a flat $100 per month like my ISP, they would, like my ISP, cap my usage.
  - nottorp 4y ago
    However, most of the cost is producing those kWh and it's linear with kWh produced, while an ISP's costs are about fixed per household...
    - mcculley 4y ago
      That’s a chicken and egg situation. The costs are fixed because they have no incentive to build more infrastructure. If you live in a place with only one or two ISPs and they only charge a flat rate per month for capped usage, you never get more bandwidth. The system is working as designed.
      - nottorp 4y ago
        The real fix is to take down some barriers to entry for new ISPs ;)