What's going to happen with these caps is that you're going to see the same kind of horror stories with bills that you see with cell phones every so often. Someone gets a bill that's a few hundred dollars higher than normal.
That's what's going to happen to someone who discovers netflix, uses it to watch 4 movies a week for a month along with everything else, and blows by their cap without really realizing it.
Usage is trending up, where Bell/Rogers/Shaw want you to trend it down, and use only their more expensive cable TV service, and the VOD where you pay $5/movie.
No, see, these bandwidth caps have been in effect for years. This is nothing new. Also, I don't know about other providers, but I get an email from Bell whenever I'm nearing my cap limit. Any non-retarded person who suddenly gets an email like that would call Bell and see what was up if they didn't know already.
I'm not defending Bell, but people are suddenly acting like bandwidth caps are new. This announcement about the UBB regulation had nothing to do with Bell and caps. They are there already.
If you live in western Canada, bandwidth caps *are* new. Sure Shaw and Telus may have had them on the books, but until this year they have never been enforced, ever.
This is something that's completely new to everyone west of Ontario, and we are not happy.
I reliably get real-world transfers of 4000Kbps+, so I'm happy enough with it. I could get faster speeds from Bell, but it would mean spending a lot more each month (roughly double what I pay now) and living with Bell's horrible support. So not worth it.
Holy crap, the guy in charge of the CRTC is comparing internet usage to oil, among other things.
KVF defends Internet metering. "I would like to reiterate the Commission’s view that usage-based billing is a legitimate principle for pricing Internet services. We are convinced that Internet services are no different than other public utilities, and the vast majority of Internet users should not be asked to subsidize a small minority of heavy users. For us, it is a question of fundamental fairness. Let me restate: ordinary users should not be forced to subsidize heavy users."
Holy crap, the guy in charge of the CRTC is comparing internet usage to oil, among other things.
KVF defends Internet metering. "I would like to reiterate the Commission’s view that usage-based billing is a legitimate principle for pricing Internet services. We are convinced that Internet services are no different than other public utilities, and the vast majority of Internet users should not be asked to subsidize a small minority of heavy users. For us, it is a question of fundamental fairness. Let me restate: ordinary users should not be forced to subsidize heavy users."
he is wrong in that today's heavy users are tomorrow's ordinary users
trying to prevent that future is lunacy
curly haired boy on
Registered just for the Mass Effect threads | Steam: click ^^^ | Origin: curlyhairedboy
Gotta hand it to the Tory government for jumping on this. It always feels weird when their interests intersect with mine, but I'll take it.
Don't congratulate them too much, they're only stepping in due to it being political suicide if they don't, especially when we'd head into an election before long.
Plus it's their problem to begin with, seeing as how, if I recall correctly, the CRTC is filled with tory appointees.
I love the argument that the light users are unfairly subsidizing the heavy users. If caps are created/lowered on all plans then the only way that light users benefit is if their basic monthly rates drop in price as well. Anyone foolish enough to think that will happen?
Gotta hand it to the Tory government for jumping on this. It always feels weird when their interests intersect with mine, but I'll take it.
Don't congratulate them too much, they're only stepping in due to it being political suicide if they don't, especially when we'd head into an election before long.
Plus it's their problem to begin with, seeing as how, if I recall correctly, the CRTC is filled with tory appointees.
I agree that's the end point, but in a different way. They're selling a product (cable TV) that they know is about to be superceded by superior, cheaper alternatives. They need to force these alternatives to not-exist, or at least make their use inefficient. To do this, they need to price the deliver method which they have control over.
The basic problem is exactly the same as the on the music publishers are dealing with - the product they're selling is no longer supply costrained. That is, it makes zip all difference if one person or one million people want the thing they're selling - they can all get it, without any scarcity. The base issue is the same - the content they actually deliver (music or TV) is in effectively near-infinite supply. So it's worthless as a saleable, profit making item, and...well, long term they're fucked.
But we can't have that, so we have to find a way to 'allow' them to make profits, i.e. force artificial value. Really, the long term side effect is that any kind of etertainment media is going to end up free, and the delivery mechanism cheap, and it's all going to be supported by other profit making ancillary schemes.
In other words, Ayn Rand and her Galt were right about one thing - if anyone ever invents a perpetual motion machine, their first thought isn't going to be "Sweet, and end to need and want the world over!" it'll be more like "Well fuck, how do I make money off of this?"
JihadJesus on
0
Options
FiggyFighter of the night manChampion of the sunRegistered Userregular
I reliably get real-world transfers of 4000Kbps+, so I'm happy enough with it. I could get faster speeds from Bell, but it would mean spending a lot more each month (roughly double what I pay now) and living with Bell's horrible support. So not worth it.
5megabit will not get you 4000kilobytes per second. Are your downloads measured in kilobits for some odd reason?
I reliably get real-world transfers of 4000Kbps+, so I'm happy enough with it. I could get faster speeds from Bell, but it would mean spending a lot more each month (roughly double what I pay now) and living with Bell's horrible support. So not worth it.
5megabit will not get you 4000kilobytes per second. Are your downloads measured in kilobits for some odd reason?
A 5Megabit line will give you 625k/sec tops.
..thats exactly what he said, 4000 kilobits, kbps=kilobit, kBps=kilobyte
FiggyFighter of the night manChampion of the sunRegistered Userregular
edited February 2011
But who the heck talks about their download speeds in bits? That's something the ISPs started doing just so their line speeds would seem better. Don't play into their hands!!!
Or I guess it sounds really cool. I get 12000k/sec.
But who the heck talks about their download speeds in bits? That's something the ISPs started doing just so their line speeds would seem better. Don't play into their hands!!!
Or I guess it sounds really cool. I get 12,000,000 baud. 8-)
Missed much of it myself but heard that Bell and the CRTC has been getting ripped a new one big time.
Last I heard, the CRTC was saying they will "delay their decision" another 60 days. In other words, give us more time to try to convince you that this isn't a corporate smashing of all competition.
I don't think they realize how much the feds are considering this an election move.
Missed much of it myself but heard that Bell and the CRTC has been getting ripped a new one big time.
Last I heard, the CRTC was saying they will "delay their decision" another 60 days. In other words, give us more time to try to convince you that this isn't a corporate smashing of all competition.
I don't think they realize how much the feds are considering this an election move.
From what I read CRTC has been called out for not knowing jack on the issue and Bell has been called out repeatedly as trying to do this as a money grab more then anything.
Supposedly it's been glorious, I wish I had caught it all, hopefully can listen to the full thing later.
Cade on
0
Options
FiggyFighter of the night manChampion of the sunRegistered Userregular
Missed much of it myself but heard that Bell and the CRTC has been getting ripped a new one big time.
Last I heard, the CRTC was saying they will "delay their decision" another 60 days. In other words, give us more time to try to convince you that this isn't a corporate smashing of all competition.
I don't think they realize how much the feds are considering this an election move.
From what I read CRTC has been called out for not knowing jack on the issue and Bell has been called out repeatedly as trying to do this as a money grab more then anything.
Supposedly it's been glorious, I wish I had caught it all, hopefully can listen to the full thing later.
Could you link it here later if you remember? I'll forget to go looking for it.
Missed much of it myself but heard that Bell and the CRTC has been getting ripped a new one big time.
Last I heard, the CRTC was saying they will "delay their decision" another 60 days. In other words, give us more time to try to convince you that this isn't a corporate smashing of all competition.
I don't think they realize how much the feds are considering this an election move.
From what I read CRTC has been called out for not knowing jack on the issue and Bell has been called out repeatedly as trying to do this as a money grab more then anything.
Supposedly it's been glorious, I wish I had caught it all, hopefully can listen to the full thing later.
Could you link it here later if you remember? I'll forget to go looking for it.
Well that link above is it going on now but if there is a copy of it anywhere later I shall post it no problem.
Cade on
0
Options
FiggyFighter of the night manChampion of the sunRegistered Userregular
edited February 2011
It's over. I only caught the last bit where one of the witnesses was talking about not being able to compete, as a small business owner, against the large corporations that have right-of-way access to everything involved.
“In reviewing the billing practices for mandated wholesale residential high-speed access services in this proceeding, the Commission is inviting comments on proposals for billing practices that implement these two principles, and is not limited to examining only usage-based billing,” the CRTC said in a letter to parties participating in the proceeding.
The two guiding principles for the review, the CRTC said, are that “ordinary consumers served by small Internet service providers (Small ISPs) should not have to fund the bandwidth used by the heaviest retail Internet service consumers”; and that “it is in the best interest of consumers that Small ISPs, which offer competitive alternatives to the incumbent carriers, should continue to do so.”
Several small ISPs and public interest groups had called for an expanded proceeding that included a comprehensive review of the regulatory framework governing the incumbents’ sale of wholesale Internet services to small competitors.
“The CRTC will not be expanding the scope, as requested by several parties, to include the billing practices for retail Internet services. There is no evidence that market forces are not working properly in this unregulated market,” the commission added in a release Friday.
In other words, the CRTC is going to come back with the exact same shit and it's not going to do anything to help retail customers.
The CRTC said its review of "wholesale residential high-speed Internet access services" in response to the controversy over usage-based billing and bandwidth limits will include a public hearing on July 11 in Gatineau, Que.
Why are they having a public hearing on July 11th when their decision has to go down no later than May 1st?
Looks like it's time to kick up another shitstorm, and the kick needs to be soon if there's going to be another election call.
I swear any time there is outrage they(any company that goes through something like this) then backs down, promises not to do it, waits a few weeks or month or maybe even a year and then hey it's back. They pretty much expect people to not get up in a fuss about it then, strangely enough they tend to be right. Why I got no idea.
I'm not surprised either. I was interested in going to one of their "consultation sessions" but couldn't and reading Shaw's web page about the meetings seems to indicate there wasn't much attendance. The predictions are looking to be true that the telecom companies are just waiting until after the election before going ahead.
Posts
If you live in western Canada, bandwidth caps *are* new. Sure Shaw and Telus may have had them on the books, but until this year they have never been enforced, ever.
This is something that's completely new to everyone west of Ontario, and we are not happy.
he is wrong in that today's heavy users are tomorrow's ordinary users
trying to prevent that future is lunacy
Registered just for the Mass Effect threads | Steam: click ^^^ | Origin: curlyhairedboy
What utter BS.
Don't congratulate them too much, they're only stepping in due to it being political suicide if they don't, especially when we'd head into an election before long.
Plus it's their problem to begin with, seeing as how, if I recall correctly, the CRTC is filled with tory appointees.
Ah yes, there we come to it at last.
Also the other CRTC guy said "gigahertz cap"
Or am I missing the point entirely?
2D fan confirmed?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJtWU3Pn4Yc
The basic problem is exactly the same as the on the music publishers are dealing with - the product they're selling is no longer supply costrained. That is, it makes zip all difference if one person or one million people want the thing they're selling - they can all get it, without any scarcity. The base issue is the same - the content they actually deliver (music or TV) is in effectively near-infinite supply. So it's worthless as a saleable, profit making item, and...well, long term they're fucked.
But we can't have that, so we have to find a way to 'allow' them to make profits, i.e. force artificial value. Really, the long term side effect is that any kind of etertainment media is going to end up free, and the delivery mechanism cheap, and it's all going to be supported by other profit making ancillary schemes.
In other words, Ayn Rand and her Galt were right about one thing - if anyone ever invents a perpetual motion machine, their first thought isn't going to be "Sweet, and end to need and want the world over!" it'll be more like "Well fuck, how do I make money off of this?"
5megabit will not get you 4000kilobytes per second. Are your downloads measured in kilobits for some odd reason?
A 5Megabit line will give you 625k/sec tops.
..thats exactly what he said, 4000 kilobits, kbps=kilobit, kBps=kilobyte
Or I guess it sounds really cool. I get 12000k/sec.
Fixed that for you.
Missed much of it myself but heard that Bell and the CRTC has been getting ripped a new one big time.
Last I heard, the CRTC was saying they will "delay their decision" another 60 days. In other words, give us more time to try to convince you that this isn't a corporate smashing of all competition.
I don't think they realize how much the feds are considering this an election move.
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
From what I read CRTC has been called out for not knowing jack on the issue and Bell has been called out repeatedly as trying to do this as a money grab more then anything.
Supposedly it's been glorious, I wish I had caught it all, hopefully can listen to the full thing later.
Could you link it here later if you remember? I'll forget to go looking for it.
Well that link above is it going on now but if there is a copy of it anywhere later I shall post it no problem.
That's more like it.
No transcript?
Can't listen to this while at work.
Shaw has decided to open a dialog with their customers before starting to charge for overages in the west
Currently they have their rates at $2/gb for cheaper packages and $1/GB for the better ones.
Pretty sure they are only doing it to screw netflix, hopefully we can convince them to go with a reasonable rate, I could handle $0.25/Gb.
Sorry man, nothing I know of yet.
Well, the better idea would be to just have better packages that include more base bandwidth.
My current package with Bell is 50GB and another $5 GB "usage insurance," bringing me to 90GB/mo.
I'll eventually switch to Teksavvy for the 200GB plan once my area gets better infrastructure/my contract ends with Bell.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-Mg6pq33Zc
You can also get the transcript here.
Bell tried to sell it's BS with it's representatives, they get smacked down a few times.
.....and also this.
Looks like it's time to kick up another shitstorm, and the kick needs to be soon if there's going to be another election call.
I WILL NOT BE DOING 3DS FOR NWC THREAD. SOMEONE ELSE WILL HAVE TO TAKE OVER.
Spoiler contains Friend Codes. Won't you be my friend?
More Friend Codes!
Mario Kart Wii: 3136-6982-0286 Tetris Party: 2364 1569 4310
Guitar Hero: Metallica: 1032 7229 7191
TATSUNOKO VS CAPCOM: 1935-2070-9123
Nintendo DS:
Worms: Open Warfare 2: 1418-7870-1606 Space Bust-a-Move: 017398 403043
Scribblenauts: 1290-7509-5558
can't you run them out on a rail?
Registered just for the Mass Effect threads | Steam: click ^^^ | Origin: curlyhairedboy
Just heard this on the news on the way home. Shaw is apparently up to its old tricks again.
http://openmedia.ca/news/shaw-revive-metered-internet
I swear any time there is outrage they(any company that goes through something like this) then backs down, promises not to do it, waits a few weeks or month or maybe even a year and then hey it's back. They pretty much expect people to not get up in a fuss about it then, strangely enough they tend to be right. Why I got no idea.