smokeyone, on 17 May 2014 - 09:33 AM, said:
If you are utilizing services that eat up broadband at a higher rate wouldn't it make sense to tier up the service plan and pay more? Broadband is limited and when it reaches a cerian point it slows down. Just like the router in your home only pushes so much broadband into your home and when too many people do too much on it it bogs down. If an ISP throttles down high use products to save broadband from boging down the whole system how can that be wrong? The company charging the end user isn't paying the ISP for the high use on the broadband and it is impacting the whole system.
People might not remember this but in the 90s when the internet was just starting to show up in homes on dial up you could count on it slowing down when schools let out and more people got on. That changed when dial up died and more bandwidth was added and cable companies replaced phone companies as ISP providers. With the increased use of hulu+, Netflix, steam and like companies without another increase in bandwidth I am afraid we are headed to another predictable overall slow down during peak hours use. Most cable companies are now using bandwidth to push, TV service, On Demand video, telephone, home security and basic internet on their systems. With a limited bandwidth forecast when you have too many users going above that and over using their allotted bandwidth you slow the whole network in your area.
The problem with tiered payment systems for the internet is that it essentially allows the large corporations to operate on a completely different playing field then start ups. If you care about small business and internet entrepreneurship at all, you should support net neutrality. It's one thing to pay more for more usage, that is already happening, but the new bills would allow bigger corporations to buy internet fast lanes that would put them at a higher playing field than small business and limit the success of internet start-ups. The internet is a utility and it should be treated as such. I am fully in support of it being reclassified as a Title II Common Carrier. This means they have to operate at cost, or slightly above cost. This is better for the consumer as opposed to the price-gouging we see with the current classification.
As far as the second bolded point, this wouldn't be an issue at all if ISP would stop dragging their feet about converting to fiber. The bandwidth is severely limited by Cable Companies insisting on staying with copper wired internet lines. The ISP are responsible for the slow downs, not the consumers and their habits. They are fully capable of supporting every bit of internet activity if they wanted to. They don't though, because that would eliminate their ability to squeeze extra dollars out of consumers by offering faster internet speeds.