Third largest American ISP takes away unlimited data from customers, sells it back for $50 extra - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=Revenge282;52593704]But there is no cost to data. There is only a cost to bandwidth. Using data doesn't physically deteriorate network equipment, or buried cable. The only issue is bandwidth exceeding capacity. Pushing 1 byte or 1 terabyte over a cable is completely indifferent so long as everyone has their allocated bandwidth.[/QUOTE] Data is the result of bandwidth over time. So data has a proportional cost.

[QUOTE=Levelog;52593665]The problem with just charging for data is how big of a pipe do you give everyone? If you give people a gig connection and charge by gig or something your infrastructure is going to either be completely fucked during peak times or stupidly overbuilt for what you need the rest of the time and increase costs.[/QUOTE] congestion was never a problem [url]http://www.pcworld.com/article/3002592/networking/comcast-data-caps-aren-t-about-congestion-leaked-memo-shows.html[/url]

[QUOTE=Perrine;52593743]congestion was never a problem [url]http://www.pcworld.com/article/3002592/networking/comcast-data-caps-aren-t-about-congestion-leaked-memo-shows.html[/url][/QUOTE] It's not the reason for the data caps, but congestion [I]is[/I] a real concern and is a factor in networking, especially in smaller areas with large populations. Like Manhattan.

[QUOTE=Perrine;52593743]congestion was never a problem [url]http://www.pcworld.com/article/3002592/networking/comcast-data-caps-aren-t-about-congestion-leaked-memo-shows.html[/url][/QUOTE] Congestion is absolutely a problem, but should be fairly unrelated to datacaps and is a shit reason to implement them. Congestion will always be a potential problem unless everyone in the country switches to circuits and build out has zero oversubbing which is completely unrealistic.

[QUOTE=glitchvid;52593709]Data is the result of bandwidth over time. So data has a proportional cost.[/QUOTE] So you are attacking the symptoms and not the cause? If you either: a) sell only available bandwidth, so that even at 100% use the line can still support everyone (which, yes, I know they don't do and oversell lines) b) add more bandwidth capacity to meet demand You would fix the "data problem", which isn't a problem to begin with. It's a bandwidth problem.

[QUOTE=Revenge282;52593841]So you are attacking the symptoms and not the cause? If you either: a) sell only available bandwidth, so that even at 100% use the line can still support everyone (which, yes, I know they don't do and oversell lines) b) add more bandwidth capacity to meet demand You would fix the "data problem", which isn't a problem to begin with. It's a bandwidth problem.[/QUOTE] You're sort of ignoring the rest of what I've said. Mobile carriers sell data because it's infeasible to sell anything close to bandwidth. I think landline should be sold the same way colocating does it, by Mb/s/month (bandwidth), but that can be calculated out into data per month. You can literally calculate your internet plans bandwidth by dividing their bandwidth cap by the time in your billing cycle.

[QUOTE=glitchvid;52593877]You're sort of ignoring the rest of what I've said. Mobile carriers sell data because it's infeasible to sell anything close to bandwidth. I think landline should be sold the same way colocating does it, by Mb/s/month (bandwidth), but that can be calculated out into data per month. You can literally calculate your internet plans bandwidth by dividing their bandwidth cap by the time in your billing cycle.[/QUOTE] I'm not arguing about mobile data. It should be done the same way honestly if they are going to charge tiered rates. Using your method of billing is pointless because the amount of data I push through my line is pointless. The only concern the infrastructure has is how fast you push data through it.

And when you're pushing it through

I'm honestly surprised my internet provider (Verizon) hasn't stooped to the new low of data caps even though they're on the top providers in the US.

[QUOTE=Levelog;52594043]And when you're pushing it through[/QUOTE] I suppose, but ideally we live in a world where peak hours means 90% load, not 140%.

[QUOTE=Revenge282;52594093]I suppose, but ideally we live in a world where peak hours means 90% load, not 140%.[/QUOTE] That's a very unrealistic world tbh

[QUOTE=Levelog;52594114]That's a very unrealistic world tbh[/QUOTE] It is, but either way, peak times/loads don't justify data caps.

I wish people would put more pressure on the anti-competition laws that governments, both federal and local, put in place.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52594173]I wish people would put more pressure on the anti-competition laws that governments, both federal and local, put in place.[/QUOTE] Too bad lobbying and slimy politicians have made sure that will probably not happen in a long time

[QUOTE=Revenge282;52594143]It is, but either way, peak times/loads don't justify data caps.[/QUOTE] Agreed there