3 ms·

We must ensure ISPs don't stop the next Google getting out of the garage

31 points by ph0rque 17y ago

russell 17y ago
Corey Doctorow has a thoughtful article on how ISP's are trying to limit internet access for their own benefit. (The title is a little over the top.) Some of these things happen in the US, but seem to be stomped on by the FCC and public opinion. The rest of the world, including the UK and Europe, governments are abandoning the citizens and getting in bed with the ISP's. Corey makes the point that telcos owe us net-neutral access because they are granted a monopoly to lay the wires. I read a couple of UK nonpolitical blogs, and I find astounding the willingness to compromise what we in the US consider basic rights, like freedom of speech or unfettered telecommunications. I dont like a world with the worst of US IP policy and European speech, privacy and communications policy.
aminuit 17y ago
The issue of metered billing has been criticized here and in other places. It makes for a pretty popular punching bag, but I don't think it's fair to dismiss it as a non-issue. The ISPs have to manage oversubscription rates. It's a real problem. Total throughput is fixed at various points along the network, and there are going to be times when the demand outstrips the available capacity. So what should the ISPs do? Time Warner's recent foray into metered billing was obviously moronic. Customers shouldn't be penalized beyond their monthly payment for usage. Their plan also didn't do anything to reduce congestion during peak traffic hours. I think the onus should be on the ISP to make sure that they can actually deliver the rates that they are advertising, which are clearly far too high. The customer shouldn't get screwed just because the ISP can't manage the oversubscription rate that it wishfully dreamt up. In this scenario, advertised rates would have to drop substantially, but it means that the customer, not the big media partner, decides on his own quality of service. This is basically how it has worked for business class circuits for all of eternity. I guess I don't understand why they can't apply the same pricing model to ordinary consumers.
- graemep 17y ago
  I see nothing wrong with metered billing - and it certainly far preferable to ISPs doing deals with favoured partners. Even better, pricing could vary with price of day. There are (or, at least, were) electricity tariffs in the UK that offered low rates for a few hours at night.
  - ph0rque 17y ago
    If this happened, bittorent clients could get an automatic throttling feature built in to minimize downloading/uploading during peak hours, and maximize during off-hours.
    - aminuit 17y ago
      This makes sense for heavy bittorrent users who are generally bright enough to realize how much data they are sending back and forth, but do you really expect casual YouTube viewers to know how much data is transferred when they watch a video? What about Grandma who wants to video chat with her grandkids? Graduated metered billing makes sense for certain things: electrical power, telephone calls, etc, but it doesn't make sense for Internet usage where there is no good way for users to easily get a handle on the amount of data transfered by their applications.
      - blhack 17y ago
        How is bandwidth used any more abstract than electricity used? Grandma wants to video chat! She doesn't know how much bandwidth it uses! POOR GRANDMA! Grandma wants to run the air conditioner! She doesn't know how much power it uses! POOR GRANDMA! Maybe grandma should learn, eh?
        aminuit 17y ago
        You're being ridiculous. The marginal cost per kilobyte of data transfered during off peak hours is approximately $0.00. The marginal cost per kilowatt of electric power, while lower during off peak hours, is still material.
nazgulnarsil 17y ago
um...the main problem is that ISP's are flat out lying about infrastructure costs to make their money grab seem more legitimate.

31 points by ph0rque 17y ago

Corey Doctorow has a thoughtful article on how ISP's are trying to limit internet access for their own benefit. (The title is a little over the top.) Some of these things happen in the US, but seem to be stomped on by the FCC and public opinion. The rest of the world, including the UK and Europe, governments are abandoning the citizens and getting in bed with the ISP's. Corey makes the point that telcos owe us net-neutral access because they are granted a monopoly to lay the wires. I read a couple of UK nonpolitical blogs, and I find astounding the willingness to compromise what we in the US consider basic rights, like freedom of speech or unfettered telecommunications. I dont like a world with the worst of US IP policy and European speech, privacy and communications policy.

aminuit 17y ago

The issue of metered billing has been criticized here and in other places. It makes for a pretty popular punching bag, but I don't think it's fair to dismiss it as a non-issue. The ISPs have to manage oversubscription rates. It's a real problem. Total throughput is fixed at various points along the network, and there are going to be times when the demand outstrips the available capacity. So what should the ISPs do? Time Warner's recent foray into metered billing was obviously moronic. Customers shouldn't be penalized beyond their monthly payment for usage. Their plan also didn't do anything to reduce congestion during peak traffic hours. I think the onus should be on the ISP to make sure that they can actually deliver the rates that they are advertising, which are clearly far too high. The customer shouldn't get screwed just because the ISP can't manage the oversubscription rate that it wishfully dreamt up. In this scenario, advertised rates would have to drop substantially, but it means that the customer, not the big media partner, decides on his own quality of service. This is basically how it has worked for business class circuits for all of eternity. I guess I don't understand why they can't apply the same pricing model to ordinary consumers.

graemep 17y ago
I see nothing wrong with metered billing - and it certainly far preferable to ISPs doing deals with favoured partners. Even better, pricing could vary with price of day. There are (or, at least, were) electricity tariffs in the UK that offered low rates for a few hours at night.
- ph0rque 17y ago
  If this happened, bittorent clients could get an automatic throttling feature built in to minimize downloading/uploading during peak hours, and maximize during off-hours.
  - aminuit 17y ago
    This makes sense for heavy bittorrent users who are generally bright enough to realize how much data they are sending back and forth, but do you really expect casual YouTube viewers to know how much data is transferred when they watch a video? What about Grandma who wants to video chat with her grandkids? Graduated metered billing makes sense for certain things: electrical power, telephone calls, etc, but it doesn't make sense for Internet usage where there is no good way for users to easily get a handle on the amount of data transfered by their applications.
    - blhack 17y ago
      How is bandwidth used any more abstract than electricity used? Grandma wants to video chat! She doesn't know how much bandwidth it uses! POOR GRANDMA! Grandma wants to run the air conditioner! She doesn't know how much power it uses! POOR GRANDMA! Maybe grandma should learn, eh?
      - aminuit 17y ago
        You're being ridiculous. The marginal cost per kilobyte of data transfered during off peak hours is approximately $0.00. The marginal cost per kilowatt of electric power, while lower during off peak hours, is still material.

nazgulnarsil 17y ago

um...the main problem is that ISP's are flat out lying about infrastructure costs to make their money grab seem more legitimate.