• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Here comes metered Broadband.......suck

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Red Squirrel said:
Yeah people praise capitalism for some reason, but the very definition of capitalism is to do anything and everything it takes to maximize profits no matter how dirty or grey area it is. That means ensuring that competition can't be allowed via lobbying, treating employees like crap, doing constant mass layoffs, providing the minimal service possible without significant loss of customers - even better if you are a monopoly, because who else are they going to go to? etc etc...

Capitalism is not a good thing.
Click to expand...

🙄🙄🙄🙄
 
I've got two teen boys who play games while simultaneously streaming Netflix or Twitch.
My wife works from home online (modest), and uses Netflix.
I Steam, Stream and surf.
We pound the crap out of our service.
datauseage.jpg
 
slag said:
Yeah, and I just got the division which is like a 60 GB download on two different xboxes.. so what?

It's not a monthly type thing. I'm talking normal day to day usage, not the random game download you will make once a month or so.
Click to expand...

You may consider the bandwidth usage on a daily basis, but the ISP considers it on a monthly. Downloaded 120gb in two days? Have a 200gb cap? Well congrats, you now have 80gb for the other 28 days this month, GLHF. Oh and don't forget to give your friendly neighborhood ISP that extra $15 for each 10 gig you go over!

CuriousMike said:
I've got two teen boys who play games while simultaneously streaming Netflix or Twitch.
My wife works from home online (modest), and uses Netflix.
I Steam, Stream and surf.
We pound the crap out of our service.
datauseage.jpg
Click to expand...

According to Slag, since his two teen boys who are also constantly gaming online and his Xboxes and rokus streaming and his wife working from home doesn't use over 100gb a month, that it's impossible for you to do that too, so your chart is lie. :colbert::whiste:
 
Red Squirrel said:
Yeah people praise capitalism for some reason, but the very definition of capitalism is to do anything and everything it takes to maximize profits no matter how dirty or grey area it is. That means ensuring that competition can't be allowed via lobbying, treating employees like crap, doing constant mass layoffs, providing the minimal service possible without significant loss of customers - even better if you are a monopoly, because who else are they going to go to? etc etc...

Capitalism is not a good thing.
Click to expand...

It's not a good thing when a company like Time Warner and Comcast can use government to prevent would be competitors from competing from them. Government shouldn't pick a winner, consumers should (with their wallets).

But that kind of protection is Socialism, not Capitalism. What sucks for Americans is that we have Capitalism in all the ways it sucks, cut throat crony capitalism to muscle out the little guy, while simultaneously having Socialism only so far as it protects the biggest players from the smaller ones. The capitalism/socialism hybrid system we have in this country basically needs to be flip flopped.
 
Red Squirrel said:
Yeah people praise capitalism for some reason, but the very definition of capitalism is to do anything and everything it takes to maximize profits no matter how dirty or grey area it is. That means ensuring that competition can't be allowed via lobbying, treating employees like crap, doing constant mass layoffs, providing the minimal service possible without significant loss of customers - even better if you are a monopoly, because who else are they going to go to? etc etc...

Capitalism is not a good thing.
Click to expand...

Apparently you don't understand how capitalism is supposed to work. Where the heck did you get that definition, Bernie's handbook?

What do you think is better? Communism? /sarcasm

The problem is we have capitalism that is mired by a whole ton of things, one of which is government-sanctioned area monopolies. That isn't capitalism, but it is what we have in the broadband sector many times.
 
Red Squirrel said:
Yeah people praise capitalism for some reason, but the very definition of capitalism is to do anything and everything it takes to maximize profits no matter how dirty or grey area it is. That means ensuring that competition can't be allowed via lobbying, treating employees like crap, doing constant mass layoffs, providing the minimal service possible without significant loss of customers - even better if you are a monopoly, because who else are they going to go to? etc etc...

Capitalism is not a good thing.
Click to expand...

I agree, it's a failed system. You can see that in the US and how corrupted and rotten politics are from the rampant corruption of capitalism. But, it's the best of many failed systems.

Given a long stretch of time, I think it will be replaced by something better as the most functional standard.
 
SparkyJJO said:
Apparently you don't understand how capitalism is supposed to work. Where the heck did you get that definition, Bernie's handbook?

What do you think is better? Communism? /sarcasm

The problem is we have capitalism that is mired by a whole ton of things, one of which is government-sanctioned area monopolies. That isn't capitalism, but it is what we have in the broadband sector many times.
Click to expand...
The monopolies are due to network effects and last mile build costs. There's only 3 wires that come to your house and if it weren't for the fact that most people still think of phone and cable as different things, there would only be 2. Even if the government didn't grant franchises no one beyond the first company to build out would bother investing. And that company would be paying the neighborhood developer for the right to build out.
 
cubby1223 said:
If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times...

There is nothing inherently evil with a pay-per-use model. You have been enjoying shit-tons of content for a very long time subsidized by those who barely use their internet yet pay the same price you do.

The person maxing out his/her bandwidth 24/7/365 absolutely should pay more than someone else who just checks email once a day.
Click to expand...

WAN Bandwidth - Monthly
Date Download Upload Total
2016-04 61.85 GB 992.48 GB 1,054.33 GB
2016-03 253.72 GB 1,938.80 GB 2,192.51 GB

As a heavy user, I actually agree with that, provided costs are "reasonable". Meaning, if I do 2TB / mo, then I don't want to pay more than $60. (Any higher, and it would be cheaper to ship HDDs via the USPS. Shocker, I know.) But by the same token, I expect to be charged far, far less, on the months that I barely do 200GB. Sure, I don't expect it would be as cheap as $6/mo, but I can dream, right? Maybe $10.
 
Honestly I'm fine with someone who uses much more than the norm paying a bit extra. However the way caps seem to be introduced is no break or a tiny break to very light users, no discount to middle tier users and a huge increase to high users.
 
None of it will ever be fair when it comes to cable companies. Comcast's pricing, for instance, is greatly geographic-dependent. The county-regulation level compared to the federal level insures there will always be a gross unevenness.

And until all of you cows rise up against the driver of the slaughter truck you are still gonna arrive at the plant with the plunger in your face.
 
CuriousMike said:
I've got two teen boys who play games while simultaneously streaming Netflix or Twitch.
My wife works from home online (modest), and uses Netflix.
I Steam, Stream and surf.
We pound the crap out of our service.
datauseage.jpg
Click to expand...

come on now, you know what else they are streaming that is using up the majority of the bandwidth...
 
Raduque said:
You may consider the bandwidth usage on a daily basis, but the ISP considers it on a monthly. Downloaded 120gb in two days? Have a 200gb cap? Well congrats, you now have 80gb for the other 28 days this month, GLHF. Oh and don't forget to give your friendly neighborhood ISP that extra $15 for each 10 gig you go over!



According to Slag, since his two teen boys who are also constantly gaming online and his Xboxes and rokus streaming and his wife working from home doesn't use over 100gb a month, that it's impossible for you to do that too, so your chart is lie. :colbert::whiste:
Click to expand...

I'm not saying anyone is lying. I'm saying that just because a handful of people on a tech forum use a lot of bandwidth, not everyone and certainly not a majority of people do this on a monthly basis. You want to use more than average, you pay more than most. It's not difficult to rationalize. Use more, pay more.

I rarely stream twitch. I don't netflix, but do watch sling every once and again. I have two teenage boys, both game. We have one 4k tv in the house, but never watch the content and by and large, most people in this country do not have 4k TVs and don't stream at that resolution. A handful of people on this forum who are whining about limits does not constitute the majority of people who purchase or use broadband. The few who use more than what the ISPS want to include will pay more.
 
Sonikku said:
It's not a good thing when a company like Time Warner and Comcast can use government to prevent would be competitors from competing from them. Government shouldn't pick a winner, consumers should (with their wallets).

But that kind of protection is Socialism, not Capitalism. What sucks for Americans is that we have Capitalism in all the ways it sucks, cut throat crony capitalism to muscle out the little guy, while simultaneously having Socialism only so far as it protects the biggest players from the smaller ones. The capitalism/socialism hybrid system we have in this country basically needs to be flip flopped.
Click to expand...

Yep and mention the word socialism and everybody freaks out. Businesses should be regulated, not people. But with capitalism, companies can basically just ask the government to make whatever regulations fit their needs so they can continue to maximize their profits. The main goal is typically to avoid any kind of competition as that makes everything else easier.
 
Sonikku said:
It's not a good thing when a company like Time Warner and Comcast can use government to prevent would be competitors from competing from them. Government shouldn't pick a winner, consumers should (with their wallets).

But that kind of protection is Socialism, not Capitalism. What sucks for Americans is that we have Capitalism in all the ways it sucks, cut throat crony capitalism to muscle out the little guy, while simultaneously having Socialism only so far as it protects the biggest players from the smaller ones. The capitalism/socialism hybrid system we have in this country basically needs to be flip flopped.
Click to expand...

Brilliantly said!
 
This is why it's sometimes grating to me when I hear about how the ultra rich running these business and the government should be taxed less and less. Because if they got rich that must clearly mean they earned and deserved every single dollar. Through blood sweat and tears no doubt!

What a joke. More and more the super rich in this country get gains that are ill gotten.
 
Red Squirrel said:
Yep and mention the word socialism and everybody freaks out. Businesses should be regulated, not people. But with capitalism, companies can basically just ask the government to make whatever regulations fit their needs so they can continue to maximize their profits. The main goal is typically to avoid any kind of competition as that makes everything else easier.
Click to expand...

To be fair, Socialism isn't the answer. Socialistic policies, on the other hand, are definitely needed to varying degrees. I've grown sick of the number of "oh hell no" complaints when discussing the idea of a Democratic Socialist as President. I've got to imagine that 9/10 of those simply hear the word Socialist and immediately assume links to our ever-present evil enemies of the Communist world. And they say Socialism is a hop skip and jump away from Communism. It may be closer but it's no closer to Communism than it is further away from Capitalism.

What these people also love to forget, ignore, or cry "It can't happen here!", our current government is only a hop, skip, and jump away from becoming a Fascist state. The U.S. is slowly progressing ever more "Right" in the political spectrum, where even our "Liberals" are more often Moderate or Right on the global scale. So when we get true Liberals who are mostly Left, all those who would prefer the slide toward Fascism become agitated and vehemently against what they don't know.

And Capitalism isn't inherently evil or beneficial, it's a mixed bag depending on how the government regulates it. You can regulate Capitalism and remain a capitalistic society.
What one has to understand is Capitalism is like a Rectangle, whereas Laissez-Faire Capitalism is a Square. While the latter is also a Rectangle, the former is not a Square.

Many wrongly equate Capitalism with the old beliefs of Laissez-Faire Capitalism, which equates to zero regulation, letting the market and consumers figure things out. We quickly came to realize that would not work so perfectly, so we, as a society, have slowly increased the amount of regulation over the centuries to protect and benefit the consumers.

However, what gets in the way is cronyism, Corporatocracy, and in some ways, an Oligarchical power structure.

So, no, Socialism is not the answer at this point in time (when the robots are doing all of our jobs, we'll revisit that discussion 😉), but adopting some Socialist concepts can do us a world of good. And it should be pointed out that the U.S. has had "Socialist" tendencies for a long while, and we've enjoyed numerous Socialist programs and policies. Social Security, Postal Service, National Park services, a permanent standing Military, national infrastructure like the Interstate highway system, Police & Fire, Public Schools, etc etc etc... oh, and let's not forget the Auto industry bailouts, and bailing out the Banks.

And, get this, that evil Democratic Socialist is thoroughly AGAINST bailouts. Imagine that. It doesn't have to be all in.


Sorry, I got off on a rant. My bad!
I just really really want a superior media/broadband infrastructure, among many things.
 
BarkingGhostar said:
I hear this all the time, but I want sources where the government has paid for the majority this century.
Click to expand...

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/CenturyLink-Takes-3-Billion-in-Government-Subsidies-134930

CenturyLink has announced that the company intends to take $3 billion in government subsidies to shore up the company's broadband network gaps. According to the CenturyLink announcement, the telco will take $500 million a year for six years from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)'s Connect America Fund (CAF). In exchange, it will expand broadband to approximately 1.2 million rural households and businesses in 33 states.
Click to expand...

dated august 28 2015

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/...-FCC-Subsidies-For-Broadband-Expansion-134949

AT&T has accepted up to $3 billion in government subsidies over six years to expand broadband service to rural areas. By accepting the FCC's CAF funding, AT&T is obligated to bring speeds of at least 10 Mbps downstream to 2.2 million rural locations in 18 of the 21 states in its operating territory. Unlike companies like CenturyLink, AT&T indicates to the FCC that a significant amount of these deployments will likely be wireless, not DSL or fiber.
Click to expand...

there's a total of 6 billion.
 
According to Comcast, 245 GB of data is apparently worth about $5.

http://customer.xfinity.com/help-and-support/internet/exp-fdo-data-plan/
 
Last edited:
I recently swapped from Uverse to Suddenlink 200 d 20u service. My first month cycle is over the 21st and I am at about 450 gigs this month, which is my cap. My wife called yesterday and found out for $5 a month I get unlimited! So 65/month for 200 down I can deal with, I was paying 25.month for Uverse 6 d .5 u for years. It was supposed to be $50.month but I would also call in for a discount.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top