internet toll roads 2010+

Last night during international news net it seems canada will be trying sout a cable like isp with people signing into packages of sites to visit and paying more outisde of any package to visit a site for 2010 then its spreading throughout the rest of the world after canada's trial run.

farnese wrote:

Last night during international news net it seems canada will be trying sout a cable like isp with people signing into packages of sites to visit and paying more outisde of any package to visit a site for 2010 then its spreading throughout the rest of the world after canada's trial run.

I heard about this news a few weeks ago. There are some thinking that there's gonna be a bandwidth apocalypse with the Internet by 2010 because the Internet would no longer be able to handle so many people using large amounts of bandwidth on activity like P2P and streaming video. If this were to happen, then ISPs would start to be in complete control of what sites you can go to and it would completely put an end to the debate of network neutrality.

Well Its still the isp's fault for not upgrading infrastructure for increased traffic besides they wont stop anything since they can't make people sign up for packages since its free right now to go to any site how are they going to sell this anyway


we'll limit which sites you can go to by the people who pay us more they are the only places you can go but if you want an alternate to major news network sites your going to pay over$ 50 for that alternative blog you usually go to.

farnese wrote:

Well Its still the isp's fault for not upgrading infrastructure for increased traffic besides they wont stop anything since they can't make people sign up for packages since its free right now to go to any site how are they going to sell this anyway

Upgrading the infrastructure costs ISPs money and that is something they won't do too easily unless it profits them in any way. It's like trying to convince them to lay out DSL and cable lines out in rural areas.

Some ISPs have responded to increased bandwidth traffic by setting monthly caps on how much you can surf the net a month and having by-the-byte overage fees if you go over that set cap. Cable ISPs like Time Warner Cable and Comcast are in the early stages of deploying gigabyte caps. Wireless ISPs like AT&T and Verizon Wireless have 5 GB monthly caps where the punishment for going over can vary from having overage fees by each megabyte you go over, having your bandwidth throttled, or worst, having your contract terminated and paying an early termination fee which is a good couple hundred dollars.

We had monthly bandwidth cap ever since we got broadband Internet back in '99 or 2000, so it's nothing new. It started at 8GB/month back then, now it's 35GB.

Joker wrote:

farnese wrote:

Well Its still the isp's fault for not upgrading infrastructure for increased traffic besides they wont stop anything since they can't make people sign up for packages since its free right now to go to any site how are they going to sell this anyway

Upgrading the infrastructure costs ISPs money and that is something they won't do too easily unless it profits them in any way. It's like trying to convince them to lay out DSL and cable lines out in rural areas.

Some ISPs have responded to increased bandwidth traffic by setting monthly caps on how much you can surf the net a month and having by-the-byte overage fees if you go over that set cap. Cable ISPs like Time Warner Cable and Comcast are in the early stages of deploying gigabyte caps. Wireless ISPs like AT&T and Verizon Wireless have 5 GB monthly caps where the punishment for going over can vary from having overage fees by each megabyte you go over, having your bandwidth throttled, or worst, having your contract terminated and paying an early termination fee which is a good couple hundred dollars.

Company laziness to upgrade infrastructure is such bliss... So far AT7T hasn't given me any problems with bandwidth caps since we first got it... but I've used comcast at my dad's place and they definitely have caps set on a number of download mediums... :\

As for the internet toll roads, seems rather stupid considering that there are MILLIONS of websites globally. So far the only limitations I've heard about are download charges which charge for each gigabyte, I think the one I heard about was time warner in fact... Still not a prospect I'd like to see... such limitations would kill independent websites....

==Kyuubi== wrote:

Joker wrote:

farnese wrote:

Well Its still the isp's fault for not upgrading infrastructure for increased traffic besides they wont stop anything since they can't make people sign up for packages since its free right now to go to any site how are they going to sell this anyway

Upgrading the infrastructure costs ISPs money and that is something they won't do too easily unless it profits them in any way. It's like trying to convince them to lay out DSL and cable lines out in rural areas.

Some ISPs have responded to increased bandwidth traffic by setting monthly caps on how much you can surf the net a month and having by-the-byte overage fees if you go over that set cap. Cable ISPs like Time Warner Cable and Comcast are in the early stages of deploying gigabyte caps. Wireless ISPs like AT&T and Verizon Wireless have 5 GB monthly caps where the punishment for going over can vary from having overage fees by each megabyte you go over, having your bandwidth throttled, or worst, having your contract terminated and paying an early termination fee which is a good couple hundred dollars.

Company laziness to upgrade infrastructure is such bliss... So far AT7T hasn't given me any problems with bandwidth caps since we first got it... but I've used comcast at my dad's place and they definitely have caps set on a number of download mediums... :\

The only ISP that I know of which has been making great efforts to expand its networks without implementing caps is Verizon with its DSL and FIOS networks. FIOS has made cable ISPs in some markets nervous because they know they lack the infrastructure to be at an even level with Verizon's FIOS.

Comcast has especially gotten a bad rep from both customers and the FCC by manipulating incoming packets of data to slow down downloads from P2P programs. A good number of ISPs don't know how to deal with the rising use of P2P since such connections make full use of the bandwidth that one's connection can get which can take a toll on their networks if there is heavy use of P2P. These ISPs are under the assumption that people would rarely make full use of the bandwidth speed of their Internet connection.

Joker wrote:

Comcast has especially gotten a bad rep from both customers and the FCC by manipulating incoming packets of data to slow down downloads from P2P programs. A good number of ISPs don't know how to deal with the rising use of P2P since such connections make full use of the bandwidth that one's connection can get which can take a toll on their networks if there is heavy use of P2P. These ISPs are under the assumption that people would rarely make full use of the bandwidth speed of their Internet connection.

Yeah, last time I used a P2P program on comcast it knocked out the connection for three days... they are heavily unfriendly with P2P downloading and they make it nearly impossible. I've heard of a range of problems with their services beyond that as well... Either way I limit my P2P downloads anyway, I run it such that I get my normal download speeds without using all of the bandwidth... likely why AT&T hasn't given me too many issues yet.

Interesting read

http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/Shed-No-Tiers-for-Broadband-Pricing/

I find this a bitter move by ISPs, seeing as fiber optics are more cost-efficient than laying down more copper-based infrastructure, and fiber WAN lines can carry up to fourteen TERABITS per second. I mean...come on. XD