Ramblings of an old Doc

 

Comcast is a very big ISP. Comcast executive V.P. David Cohen is quoted as saying recently that caps are going to be reinstated sometime within the next five years. He insisted that this is a much fairer system as those who use less bandwidth will pay less. Wanna bet? I still remember when cable t.v. was sold as television without commercials. How’s that working for you?

True, on one level apples and oranges. They maintain that this keeps the cost down. That’s code for ‘this makes us more money’. After all, why do teachers make what they do and NBA basketball players what they do?

"People who use more should pay more and people who use less should pay less," Cohen said. He then suggested that, should his company keep bandwidth limits at arm's length, everyone would pay more for their monthly subscriptions.” – PCWorld

That would be true if the resource involved were an un-renewable/limited physical resource. It isn’t. Like De Beers and diamonds, cable companies reap large benefits by limiting the resource. In the case of the ISP, not expanding the infrastructure is how that’s done. Google’s fiber cable projects prove my point.

I’m for truth in advertising. When cable companies create bottle necks (by not increasing the infrastructure) in order to charge more, despite the negative effects on the internet and commerce, someone has to call them on it.

It isn’t going to be the FCC with its wishy-washy decision not preventing ISPs from letting tech titans such as Netflix or Google pay for faster data speeds but would require that competing traffic move at “reasonable” speeds.

What is that “reasonable speed”? and who determines it? Why the ISPs, of course. “Wanted: Foxes to guard the chicken coop.” Who’s going to monitor “financial feasibility”? The FCC, because the government does that so well. What could go wrong?

The FCC? Completely neutral! “Wanted: Former cabal lobbyist for Chairman position.” Why do I get recurrent visions of Sergeant Schultz? What bothers me the most in all this? The net will suffer as well as the economy. Innovators will be stifled.

We all object when politicians want to centralize more and more power. We’d better be doing the same with telecommunications companies.

Forget the FCC. What’s their policy going to be? Doublethink:

“FCC officials speaking on background maintained that enforcing a reasonable standard of broadband performance will allow innovation and competition in online products and services and, by extension, lower prices for consumers. “The end result is this: no blocking will be the law of the land,” the FCC spokesman said.“This targets conduct that threatens an open Internet.” The FCC planned to look into whether some ISP practices are so unreasonable they can be banned, but said it does not intend a flat rule preventing some traffic to be prioritized.” – RawStory

Bye bye net neutrality.

Sources:

http://www.infopackets.com/news/9031/comcast-reinstate-bandwidth-caps-fair-or-foul

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/25/goodbye-net-neutrality-fccs-new-internet-rules-create-incentives-for-discrimination/


Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on May 19, 2014

When I started here at Wincustomize [and before] I was 'managing' my bit of Stardock's site/s on 56k dialup ...at a cost of $3 per hour...OK, no 'limit' on downloads....and no limit on hours ....but I do remember a sevice pack for XP taking 8 hours to DL...aka $24.

Now it may be ADSL2 .. but it's capped and throttled...and nowhere near as fast as what the US consumers get.

25gig per month is enough...but it's $70-odd per.

It'd be 'nice' if there was a level playing field world-wide ....

on May 19, 2014

I guess I'm luckier than most. My connection is a steady 62Mbps with no limits for £27 per month including line rental and evening/weekend calls.

I expect some remote locations are difficult to get a good service to. Some of the country areas here can't get better than 1Mbps and some are less than that.

on May 19, 2014

I get around 50 Mbps with no limits for $40 a month. That also includes the Comcast router. Guess I can't complain.

on May 19, 2014

Lets see what happens when Comcast buys time/warner and AT&T buys Directv.  I don't have cable where I live, its 4 blocks away with no thoughts of expansion.  Verizon(non fiber optics), so my choice for TV is directv or dish.  I have satellite for internet with a choice of a few companies.  Hughes (the biggest)is one at $80+,

I have one of the smaller ones at $41 a month.  Charter is the only cable company that can do my town which they have done about 70% with no plans to finish at this time.

on May 19, 2014

They'd rather sit on their mountains of cash than increase availability.

on May 19, 2014

The heart of the problem lies with the legally meditated nature of the "corporation," (in U$a).  Legally, it is required to generate, every quarter, the maximum return for the shareholders.  That means long term planning, investment, etc. generally take a backseat to this overriding prime directive.  As long as this remains so, the tendency will be for corporations to not be upstanding citizens or good neighbors. 

on May 19, 2014

Myth.

 

Any need to generate maximum return is based on the board firing you if you don't.  It's the short sightedness of the shareholders, not some legal requirement.

 

The fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of your shareholders does not translate to acting in the best interest of the current stock price.  Hiring a CEO is no different than hiring a realtor, or anyone else contractually obligated to work in your interest.  They're not bound to skip out on infrastructure for higher margins any more than a realtor would be required to only show you the cheapest house on the market.

on May 20, 2014

There is no legal requirement to generate maximum return each quarter.  Just look at the NYT.

Most corporations are small, closely held, non-public businesses, often with only a single shareholder.  They do what their owners want.  Just look at Stardock.

on May 20, 2014

beg google to sling fibre your way

on May 29, 2014

"generally"

2 Pages1 2