Discussion in 'The Guru's Pub' started by deltatux, Jan 31, 2011.
lol, if that's the case, Egypt is a complete failure then
Canadian TV show host George Stroumbolopoulos made a great comment about why Canada won't need to legislate an Internet kill switch like in the US.
-- The Hour with George Stroumbolopoulos - February 1, 2011 (CBC)
I can partially see why ISP's may feel the need to do this however is it really right that they make a profit(if they do) on top of the base data cost? Citizens and businesses are having to become ever reliant on the Internet and the 'dataz' on it - I really don't see why we should have to splash out more cash because corporations don't have the infrastructure to support it.
The CRTC should show the Canadian people evidence that their networks were about to fall over - maybe that would use too much bandwidth?
Infrastructure costs money
Yes it does - but where the money comes from is the issue
Yea, one time cost only. The infra maintenance costs are almost constant regardless of the bandwidth usage.
My ISP has no issues with it, they get a good bit of money from me £50($80) a month, so its not like im paying pennies for the service, you don't sell a service for the price they sell it at, and expect people not to get their money's worth.
While alot of it is piracy, its mostly on stuff i can't buy like lossless multi channel rips of vinyl albums, which are about 2-3gb each, or HDTV transport stream captures of movies that aren't available on BluRay and they are about 15-30gb per movie, even HD streams of TV shows i could just record on my cable box, but i prefer to have them and the movies on my HTPC because i have alot more free HDD space on the PC compared to on my cable box, as well as it being better quality on the PC.
Its very easy to download alot, and not be a theif, not to mention how much i download when Steam has a sale, which was over 100gb in 5-6 hours not long back.
Thats why its up to the country themselves to get things in place, they are denying alot of services to the people in their country.
These days 1tb isn't the scary amount it was a few years back, we have Digital Download services for games on the PC and on the consoles, lots of VOD services and these nearly all have 1080p 5.1 streams, even music downloads have lossless options, with some of the higher end ones also having 24/96 lossless versions.
No dude your wrong, sites make money from advertising, ISP's have the same problems as utility companies.
Infrastructure costs ****loads, main protection schemes cost ****loads, backup protection costs another ****load and the network management systems cost ****loads.
Now I do not know the intricate workings of internet distribution (its not my particular field) but I can safely assume its very similar to electricity distribution since its basically distribution of electrical signals at low voltage with more complex data mechanisms (multiplexing and other bs as opposed to power factor, power flow and other bs in power systems).
So with that part settled extend the rational to ass hats who abuse the system (Me being one them) who download alot, these consumers create problems just as the factory with machine load creates problems to the utility provider. So what are the options? either tell the end user to adjust their traffic ( cant be done in power but can be done in internet) or tell the end user to invest in the necessary infrastructure to fix the issues (what power companies do which ISPs cant).
Simple and easy rational to an obvious problem.
You have to think a bit further ahead.
Consumer product companies pay internet websites for ad space. The websites in turn pay their local host for the bandwidth. Then local network provider pays the bigger region/backend connection provider.
So the money made by selling ad space on websites trickles all the way down to the backend provider. Ads use certain amount of bandwidth, bandwidth cost just rocketed, therefore displaying ads is more costly. Now, do you really think the price of ads on the internet is going to stay the same and not raise?
Why sell "highspeed internet" when you put some arbitrary caps on the download amount? Why not face the facts and stop selling services you can't afford.
That has to be the most twisted logic ever, BW is the 'product' here what the BW is used for is irrelevant, the highest consumer of BW is downloading not Ads. ISPs are selling a good that is meter able (GB) and which costs vary according to conditions in the area AND demand (which includes a small component of advertising) ... EXACTLY like electricity or water, hell the tech is so similar that in some countries ISPs are using overhead lines to give service to remote areas.
I do not get the paragraph of "high speed internet" because the internet is very high speed right until you pass the cap, then you either pay to get more or wait till next month. I had a service of 25GB limit, it didnt last me **** so I got the 150GB package (cost me more) I do not use more then that so im cool, people who download 1tb a month have no excuse, you want the BW? YOUR GONNA HAVE TO PAY just like factories which **** with the PCC (Point of common coupling of the distribution transformer) have to pay hundreds and thousands of $$$$$$ to connect to the grid.
Bandwidth in internet terms is not the amount you download as it costs them nothing, in fact less than one cent per GB. Bandwidth is what speed you pay for, i.e.- 5mb downlink and 1mb uplink.
Now if they can't afford to fulfill their bandwidth they are selling to me, then that is fraud. It is like selling me a Lamborghini which I pay extra for to go faster, and then tell me I can only drive it 60km a month.
In Canada's unfortunate case, if I was to max out my bandwidth each month without going over the 25GB limit, then my max sustainable download speed would be 0.07605 Mb/s (megabits!), not including uploading. This is the real amount of bandwidth they are giving me, which is fraud.
On the other hand, in my country and with my ISP, I have full access to my full bandwidth. I have 12mb/s down and 1mb/s up, which means theoretically I can download 31,557GB (31.55TB!) and down + up is 34,187 GB (34.2 TB!) a month.
P.S.- I am a heavy user, yet the most I have used even with my free bandwidth and torrenting in one month is around 600GB. Usually it's a lot less, but at least the ISP gives me the freedom to choose.
Sounds like ISPs in Canada just don't want to upgrade their network....but think they should get increased profits as a result of greed and ignorance.
It's sunk cost and it has already been recovered by our tax dollar and monthly fee. Shaw, Rogers, Bell, Telus are all just milking the cow (consumers) right now. We Canadians are being taking it up the you know what and this is just outrageous. Canada is already losing its standing in the world, in 10 years we won't even be in the G8 countries. We'd be lucky to even be in the G20 nations. Do you think the next major research and breakthrough that would change the world would be invented here in Canada? Keep dreaming.
But guess what our Government and Corporations do to speed up that process? Slap a meter charge on our internet usage. What a bunch of greedy pigs sitting up there screwing the little guys, whiling sacrificing the future innovation for today's minuscule gain in their pocketbook.
Basically this and they want to force Canadians to keep their TV subscriptions. TV subscriptions aren't cheap either.
Just for cable including a couple of extra channels that aren't already free OTA costs about $80 or so which is expensive as well.
What's troublesome is that competition is so bad here that my family has to get all our services from one provider which is Rogers for cell phone, home phone, TV and Internet.
I was going to jump to TekSavvy but before they never had service in my area. Then when they did, UBB was passed and was going into effect. So I could have never switched.
The "good" that is being bought is bandwidth (Megabits PER SECOND), not data (Megabits/bytes). Or at least it used to be that way in Canada.
It would be the same as water if you'd pay some constant sum of money per month for "1 cubic meter of water per second".
Currently I have a 10/1Mbps plan for $53/mo, which is the fastest around here. I do not however have a monthly cap.
What my plan has is between Noon and Midnight if I download more than 3.5GB my speed is cut in half until the next day. It's not too bad as I don't pass it that often.
But my ISP still sucks anyway and the only alternative (DSL) is just as bad in this area. Ping times are much higher than they should be, loss of connection at times (everything seems to be working but have no internet access for 10-30 minutes) etc.
Just wish I had some of the options you guys do. But all in all something needs to happen as ISPs are going to get out of control soon and the internet is becoming ever more important in day to day life. (Like Gas, sure people don't need cars/etc but should it become unaffordable they couldn't get to work/school etc)
Where is "here"?
The best example of how bad this is was from the rogers forums.
One guy asked some one to imagine if the gas companies did this type of price structuring. Say you fill up your car at a $1.10p/lt but if you use up more than 60ltrs a month you get charged $3.50p/lt for any gas you buy after hitting that limit.
For one, no one would be able to drive. Two, evreyone would be pissed. Three, alot of people would be losing thier jobs due to inability to pay for gas to get to work.
The difference is theft. People would just be stealing alot more gas because it is a physical thing that you can actually steal. Some will even be boot legging it from cheaper places and selling it. You can't very well do that with the internet. Sure you can try and hack into your nieghbours WiFi or patch into their lan but if you get caught you are going to be paying way more than if you just bent over for them.
It is a terrible shame that the people making decisions don't fully understand the implications of their actions. Sure Bell should be compensated for their product being used. They see a potential to make some money and go for it. Good for them. It's just business. But the government should have the savy to know that this is a bit excessive and not inline with what is going on with the rest of the world.
Sell a product and make money, sure. It's what business does. Hinder the whole country from actual progress? What?!!?!!?
There was a time when canda was a leader in IT. IT required the internet. Now the internet is something that is in everything now thanks to IT development. Canada now thinks it's ok with out it. What?!!?!??!
The gas comparison is horribly poor on many levels in my opinion, i agree totally with were you are coming from, but your not going to convince people with that argument.
Something will have to be done, as advertising revenue from Canadian will no doubt go down as people browse less and less due to bandwith costs, Digital Download and VOD services will also suffer, i can't see how the government would want this to happen.
If anyone bothered to watch the video I linked, it seems like the Industry Minister wants to reverse the decision.
Currently the Liberal Party of Canada, the New Democratic Party of Canada and the Bloc Quebecois wants to push the government to reverse the decision.
Seems like everyone except the brass at the large telecoms wants this gone.