How is that any different than buying a cheap 200MB of data per month and getting cut off after minimal browsing? It’s basically the choice between a handful of sites a lot, or a ton of sites but you only have enough data to browse it once. You get what you pay for. Just like fiber vs dialup
Right well maybe you only use Facebook and would prefer unlimited Facebook instead of 200MB of yahoo or 50MB of popups. Since these are internet packages for 5 euros a month, how much cake do you expect to eat for free? You act like simply because someone has packaged internet "channels" they old model is completely gone. These are BARGAIN Plans which means beggars cant be choosers.
if the package plans make companies more money, and they are being perceived as more strategic, then your best effort default-free internet may just disappear or become drastically more expensive just because.
look what happened to static ips. not saying the situations are completely comparable, but with only one or two large corporate providers to choose from, that situation isn't implausible. I'm not looking forward to calling Comcast service to talk to them about why I can't ssh into AWS anymore.
I see what you are saying, but at the end of the day we are talking about trying to categorize literally billions of domains * 65,535 ports per address. Are you really concerned that Comcast is going to come out with tiered services depending on which IPs you want to ssh to? That seems a long way down the slippery slope to me.
Its funny how you think economics will suddenly go out the window as companies race to see who can screw the consumer more. Red tape obsessed telecoms will only spur new competition in the age of 5G where we are no longer beholden to the precious utility lines. If they do what you say, watch how many AdHoc networks popup.
because that's like going to the pool and pretending you went to the beach. That basically ruins everything good about the internet. Who would ever buy a white-list only internet plan without a gun to their head?
or some other reasonable lack of choice in the matter? thats where packages and tiers lead. if you want to do anything but use one of the predefined tiers, then its business plan for you. if we offer it.
it may be worth it to pay the 10x for you and I, but if it isn't for 80% of everyone else, that would be a pretty big change.
that may sound very drastic, but I don't see any reason why in the absence of any regulatory framework why the consumer market wouldn't end up that way in 5 years.
The reason is competition. If internet companies become that bad then I myself will start one that preserves the old way. I'm sure I'd find plenty of backing too because where there's an untapped market there's money to be made. You seem to forget that the very basic principles of supply and demand will always slaughter the pigs. Especially in the new world of 5G and beyond where utility pole lobbying will no longer be such a thorn in small businesses side.
You the consumer wield the power with your wallet. Don't do business with any ISP that treats their customers like that. I guarantee that not all ISPs will conform to the same practices because after all they are competing! If tmobile copied everything Verizon does they would be bankrupt. Companies have to act in accordance with what the market dictates, not what ever they please.
Read your own description: it's a choice between a handful of sites. That's not the internet. That relies on rent-seeking by imposing artificial tarrifs on how you want your traffic to go. This is not a technical solution to nothing. That's just a scheme to extort extra pay while imposing heavy traffic monitoring (i.e. spying) on unsuspecting users.
If that isn't clear enough, this sort of scheme does not make traffic cheaper . In fact, these schemes are devised to impose additional charges on traffic that doesn't comply with an arbitrary whitelist.
It seems to me that some libertarian capitalists are just closet authoritarian capitalists. Seeking more power for their masters just to get a bigger plate of slop. Naive of course, what incentive do they have to pay you back.
16 comments
[ 1.1 ms ] story [ 13.2 ms ] threadlook what happened to static ips. not saying the situations are completely comparable, but with only one or two large corporate providers to choose from, that situation isn't implausible. I'm not looking forward to calling Comcast service to talk to them about why I can't ssh into AWS anymore.
it may be worth it to pay the 10x for you and I, but if it isn't for 80% of everyone else, that would be a pretty big change.
that may sound very drastic, but I don't see any reason why in the absence of any regulatory framework why the consumer market wouldn't end up that way in 5 years.
You the consumer wield the power with your wallet. Don't do business with any ISP that treats their customers like that. I guarantee that not all ISPs will conform to the same practices because after all they are competing! If tmobile copied everything Verizon does they would be bankrupt. Companies have to act in accordance with what the market dictates, not what ever they please.
last mile is a pretty big barrier to entry, with all sorts of capital costs and regulatory hassle.
I work in a medium sized US city and the number of providers that will serve my business location is one. I don't think I'm alone.
If that isn't clear enough, this sort of scheme does not make traffic cheaper . In fact, these schemes are devised to impose additional charges on traffic that doesn't comply with an arbitrary whitelist.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/christinerousselle/2017/11/24/...