Verizon CTO: Broadband Throttling is Inevitable

[mlopinto2k1]

I don't think they mean throttle you back, I think they mean, stop giving you more and more bandwidth. So, if you get 2MB's, maybe they will just keep you at that and everyone else.

 

[SDSUMarcus01]

If they remove the up/down speed caps, I MAY be ok with this.

But if they charge me a flat rate for my up/down speeds and then charge for the bandwidth used... I'm gonna be pissed as shit.

Japan has a much better internet network and they don't charge based on bandwidth. *sigh*

 

[nelson_nel]

Telecommunications companies have this country in their pocket and they know it.

When they all act in concert, there is nothing you can do. I think the more important approach is to get all connections into a range of speed standards of expectation...

There are many services that pay for 7 or 10mbps of service but rarely are pulling that in as it is. A certain level of expected consistancy would be better IMO.

But, you do realize the bigger issue with this, right? This is the second part of the 'cloud'; SaaS rather.

Everyone wants a peice of the ration pie and you will pay it. Enjoy yourselves now, because you are all internet junkies and will have to decide for yourselves if its worth it in the end.

 

[nelson_nel]

Lol, just thought of this, but the internet will just turn into TV 2.0. haha

 

[gorehound]

i am pissed by these lying rich bastards so FUCK YOU from all of us poor working folks.go ahaead and fuck our internet and the money we might of spent elsewhere will be gone and who knows how many will lose in your greedy krap pricing plans.

i wish there was a way to build a network so i could underprice every one of these lying bastards.

 

[Jerky_san]

I thought verizon said they would never have caps of any sort on FIOS

 

[mikepaul]

Don't drug dealers work the same way: get people addicted then drain them dry?

"Here's a world of information and entertainment. Eat as much as you want. We'll talk later about the bill to keep it coming..."

 

[spectrewind]

"I’m not announcing a new pricing plan"

Really?? What else could it be? This is usually where people go shopping when their contract terminates.

 

[Guest]

I think ISP's are just not investing their money wisely!
With their subscribers money they still make profit!
They need to invest that profit in upgrading their network running nearly a 'non profit' organisation for several years, instead of getting away with ridiculous bonusses for the highest executives!

Truth being said, once a network is installed, the cost to keep it going is only 10% of what the customers pay for it!
That would be 10% that goes to maintenance, and new servers.
15% goes to taxes. And the remaining 75% is pure profit for the company to invest in what they think is needed, like personnel, and their own pay.
Perhaps they just invested in too much personnel,and also perhaps they invested too much in their own salary!
Even with higher demands of internet connections, the 10% spent on servers continuously gives you faster servers. And a wise company would not invest in a $100.000 server that's only 15% faster than a 30.000 server!

Heck, a lot of servers work perfectly fine with Corei7 computers instead of xeons. The cost is between a third and half of the cost of network servers.

They could improve the internet big time, by investing in fiberoptics in the cities and dense populated areas.

 

[gamerjames]

[citation][nom]mlopinto2k1[/nom]Go sob in your momma's tits. Grow up and get a life. You goddamn bandwidth hog. You probably don't even pay for your internet. Assumptions, assumptions.. probably dead accurate based on your 2 word response to REALITY.[/citation]
No need to post anything like this. Darn trolls.

 

[papasmurf]

the Internet cannot continue to grow without passing the cost on to someone.

here's what he's really saying:

the Internet cannot continue to grow without passing the cost on to someone other than us.

Maybe if they would start putting these billions in profits towards making profit in the future this wouldn't be an issue, they just want more government money, the 7.5 billion in taxpayer money obama threw at them isn't enough. Until this moron is out of office these companies are going to continue with their poor business decisions knowing that the government will just come in and pay their bills for them. Not only did the dems give the lazy among us food stamps and social security etc. they are giving corporations a similar deal. Capitalism doesn't work this way! Those that can not succeed must perish to make way for those that can! 40% of the population is supporting the other 60%

 

[bill gates is your daddy]

[citation][nom]gorehound[/nom]i wish there was a way to build a network so i could underprice every one of these lying bastards.[/citation]


There is a way.

www.greenlightnc.com

It's going to take something like this to finally tell the ISP corporations to take a long walk on a short pier.

Communities and small towns need to lead the way with programs like this. Then and only then are the people back in control.

 

[mlopinto2k1]

It almost sounds like everyone wants internet for free, or damn near it. EVERYONE HERE, BE THANKFUL FOR WHAT YOU HAVE! Why is this so hard to understand?????

 

[truerock]

Too late. Telcos and ISPs have already been selling different band-widths at different prices for 40 years.

 

[truerock]

I have no problem with ISPs selling bytes-per-month instead of bits-per-second - as long as its revenue neutral. But, in every case they have tested selling bytes-per-month they have tried to use it as a way to sneek in an approximately double or triple price increase. I guess the number of total bytes going through the internet per month is not widely known and the ISPs think they can sneak in a price increase by going to bytes-per-month. But, it could be revenue neutral if the FCC requires it.

 

[truerock]

bits-per-second and bytes-per-month are the same thing measured 2 different ways. It's largely irrelevant unless you charge a different price for the same thing.

 

[truerock]

My ISP (AT&T) sells me 1.2 megabits per second for $25 per month. That's about 394 billion bytes per month (or about 10GB per day).

 

[Major7up]

[citation][nom]pablo_max[/nom]Last time I checked my local city did not charge me a monthly fee based on how many times I drove down the road.[/citation]
Some do, have you ever heard of a toll road?

 

[Guest]

we all know that they dont have to throttle the internet. they are just saying they have to because they are greedy SOB's.

 

[jaybus]

On your local ISP's network, I'm sure they can offer you 10+ Mbps connections without an increase in cost. Problem is, most traffic doesn't stay within the local network. It has to be routed to and from other networks local to some other area, hence the "inter" in internet. The bottleneck is the pipes and switches connecting different local nets. And that is what they don't want to pay for.