More Expensive for the Internet?

[PUNK rock]

Article here.

That's because cable and telecommunications companies are forging ahead with plans to radically change their familiar flat-rate monthly Internet plans, just as new options for watching movies and TV online proliferate.

What should Web surfers expect? Usage caps that would penalize those who send and receive large amounts of data.

I'm thrilled that companies want to charge more and not put the extra money towards something useful. Say upgrading their network to avoid having bandwidth problems in the first place? The downloading and streaming of video and HD video is only going to get more popular, so let's charge people more for watching them if they like to do it a lot!

[kthx]

"Too expensive to play WoW? Try continuum, its low bandwidth"

[Lucon]

Is there anything Continuum can't solve?

[duel pasta]

Your virginity

[Downfall]

Lol

[Liquid Blue]

Your virginity

fucking gold, broseph

[Kolar]

ISPs already have usage caps in Canada, it started with them cutting people off on a 3 strike system if they exceeded something like 150-200 gigs per month. I think anything above 150 is far too much but that needed "check" on the system soon morphed into a marketing ploy, so they decided to carve it out into usage packages like a fucking cell phone. 50$ a month gets you 60 Gigs and 70-90 gets you more. If you go over 60 Gigs you pay $1.25 per extra Gig of bandwidth up to $25.

There is no capacity issue yet they're still gaming people out of their money like this. And like Punk Rock said none of it is going towards upgrading their existing network or rolling out fiber. Instead we get the "Rogers" Stadium, the Blue Jays and whatever else the Rogers family wants to piss their money away on. When you have 5 computers and 3 people (2 heavy downloaders) using a single connection it isn't easy to stay under 60 Gigs.

[Jerome Scuggs]

It costs at least $1,000,000 to build a mile of infrastructure in most areas in America... better for the consumer, yes, but economically unfeasible.

Technology can only get cheaper over time, but alot of that cost is sunk into red tape, which seems to be getting more expensive.

The businesses should be saving their profit for investing in infrastructure long term. I think that one thing this recession might do is help reinstill the notion of savings over credit, and the cost of not adjusting is bankruptcy.

[project dragon]

When you have 5 computers and 3 people (2 heavy downloaders) using a single connection it isn't easy to stay under 60 Gigs.

Try 1 house with 7 university students. : \

[PUNK rock]

50$ a month gets you 60 Gigs and 70-90 gets you more. If you go over 60 Gigs you pay $1.25 per extra Gig of bandwidth up to $25.

That shit sucks. I think I used somewhere around 300GB last month :fear:

[Squeezer]

lawl. As if some company wouldn't come out and deliver unlimited access.

And then make bank. It's not that expensive to host ISPs

[duel pasta]

rofl, we've had caps since forever here in belgium

You know what my last cap was? 10 gig download a month and for every gig extra you had to pay 1.50$! They recently raised it so its 30 gig a month now

if you think your cap sucks, dont come to belgium :P

but my 40 mbit connection makes up for that.. a tiny bit

[Vykromond]

Your virginity

damn

[Jerome Scuggs]

rofl, we've had caps since forever here in belgium

You know what my last cap was? 10 gig download a month and for every gig extra you had to pay 1.50$! They recently raised it so its 30 gig a month now

if you think your cap sucks, dont come to belgium :P

but my 40 mbit connection makes up for that.. a tiny bit

1st- i saw in bruges today and at last, someone who hates belgium more than me, ty colin farrell

2nd- yeah i think i mentioned that in a post about net neutrality, and how "unlimited broadband" is actually pretty load-intensive on the infrastructure and how european countries have been doing it for years. always progressive, those damn fuks