What if the internet was pay as you go....

[Usha Starchild]

I just read an article on treehugger Internet Plumbing Clogged - Bandwidth is Maxed Out (TreeHugger) about the internet plumbing and how its expanding fast but we are using it even faster.

In the past some people have suggested pay as you go plans. I have always been dead against this, but it’s starting to look like a good idea to me. The article claims that as much as 33% of the bandwidth is being used for P2P file sharing. Junk Email is also a big tube clogger.

World of Warcraft apparently uses 5-20mb an hour of bandwidth. So if you are a hardcore player and play 12 hours a day you might use 240mb per day. Or 7.2 gigs a month. If your internet provider gave you a rate of $2.5 dollars per/gb your WOW bill would be 18 dollars. That leaves lots of surfing, video and some porn downloads to reach the average $48.00/month broadband bill. That’s another 12.8gb to be exact. I see that as perfectly fine for the average net user. Of course the Telco’s would put the minimum charge at $45.00 and start charging 2.5 dollars per gig after you hit 20gb’s.

If emails could be throttled in this way as well it would be awesome. 1000 emails from your IP a month, after that there is a charge. We could unclog our tubes and the people who DO clog them could pay for that extra bandwidth or adjust their surfing habits accordingly.

If doing this meant lower pings, less dropped packets, less spam and a better overall surfing experience would you be for or against it, and why?

(Note: besides the usage per day for wow, and the broadband monthly rate of $48 dollars most of those numbers are made up. I’m not entirely sure what the average net user uses per day vs. hardcore filesharers, spammers etc.)

[brekk]

Knowing my usage habbits, I'd probably kill myself if i had to pay for bandwidth use.

[prescient63]

Originally Posted by Usha Starchild

I just read an article on treehugger Internet Plumbing Clogged - Bandwidth is Maxed Out (TreeHugger) about the internet plumbing and how its expanding fast but we are using it even faster.

In the past some people have suggested pay as you go plans. I have always been dead against this, but it’s starting to look like a good idea to me. The article claims that as much as 33% of the bandwidth is being used for P2P file sharing. Junk Email is also a big tube clogger.

World of Warcraft apparently uses 5-20mb an hour of bandwidth. So if you are a hardcore player and play 12 hours a day you might use 240mb per day. Or 7.2 gigs a month. If your internet provider gave you a rate of $2.5 dollars per/gb your WOW bill would be 18 dollars. That leaves lots of surfing, video and some porn downloads to reach the average $48.00/month broadband bill. That’s another 12.8gb to be exact. I see that as perfectly fine for the average net user. Of course the Telco’s would put the minimum charge at $45.00 and start charging 2.5 dollars per gig after you hit 20gb’s.

If emails could be throttled in this way as well it would be awesome. 1000 emails from your IP a month, after that there is a charge. We could unclog our tubes and the people who DO clog them could pay for that extra bandwidth or adjust their surfing habits accordingly.

If doing this meant lower pings, less dropped packets, less spam and a better overall surfing experience would you be for or against it, and why?

(Note: besides the usage per day for wow, and the broadband monthly rate of $48 dollars most of those numbers are made up. I’m not entirely sure what the average net user uses per day vs. hardcore filesharers, spammers etc.)

That seems expensive to me. I get up to 2.5TB a month from my web host for $10. I've never maxed it as that is a shit load of bandwidth but its there for me to use theoretically. When i had a VPS i was getting 500gig/month for $30 and that includes the use of hardware. Once again $45 + $2.50/gig seems expensive to me. I realize that there are economies of scale at work here and providing the infrastructure to my house as opposed to 1and1 sitting on someones backbone is quite different, but it still seems expensive. I know at work we actually have servers in level 3's buildings (I love my work internet), but I'm a little drunk and not quite sure what this has to do with anything. Oh yeah cost, we transmit massive amounts of data around and i still doubt we pay anything on the order of 45 + 2.50/gig.

[Gudrid]

If I could actually use the bandwidth I pay for and not just what my node is capable of when nobody else is using it, I would.

Minor rant since I'm a helpdesk tech. I really hate when people only use their comp to send huge ass forwards to all their friends and run stupid realtime desktop goodies. Also hate when some mom calls in wondering why her internets slow and her mouse arrow randomly jumps around: we find limewire running and its always the "son" who uses it. Also the retards who have win98 with no firewall/antispyware and 30+ tcp connections with nothing open. I wish there was an aptitude test for using the internet and all the low scoring people would be put on some sort of handicap node.

[Usha Starchild]

Like I said the numbers were just thrown out there. But I think it is safe to say there is a small percentage of internet users using a large % of the traffic.

[Soriak]

I pay about $45/month for a 10mbit/1mbit connection (no download cap) and I always get full speed... I call BS on an actual bandwidth shortage. This is just ISPs wanting to milk customers even more.

I remember when my ISP claimed they couldn't sustain the current speed and I'd get half the speed I paid for. (back when it was like 3mbit...) Then the "best effort" practice was criticized by various groups (I believe the legislature too) and suddenly getting full speed wasn't that difficult anymore - I've never had anything but 100% since.

The only long-term solution is to expand the network capabilities - if they can have 100mbit connections in Korea and (I believe) the Netherlands, there's no reason why they can't do that elsewhere.

[Sean]

Internet being clogged? Bandwidth maxed out? I don't even need to read the article to call bullshit on it. US companies basically hold what they're capable of way the hell back so they can gouge customers. Especially with cable's DOCSIS 3.0.

But hey, that's nothing new when it comes to the US and its typical business practices.

[Millie]

Hell no. I'm not going back to the early AOL chat room days, where you ended up with a $500 phone bill and a $600 AOL bill at the end of each month and had to hide from your parents on bill day.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Soriak

The only long-term solution is to expand the network capabilities - if they can have 100mbit connections in Korea and (I believe) the Netherlands, there's no reason why they can't do that elsewhere.

The fact that I'm paying 125 dollars a month for 144k IDSL while some slanty-eyed Japs and Koreans can get a 100 MB symmetrical line for jack and shit makes me want to stab people in the face until their face no longer exists.

[Malakriss]

US is behind the times significantly when it comes to comercial technology and infrastructure.

Don't encourage us to be worse

[Millie]

The US in real life is not nearly as powerful, forward-thinking, or dictatorial as the US as lead by President Millie in my Civilization IV game.

[Ortega]

Hah, I think you are way underestimating the bandwidth you use

[Cybsled]

If you actually used the internet back when it was pay-as-you-go, you will pray this never comes to be. Remember when shit like AOL was $4 an hour? Ugh. And don't get me started on local ISPs/BBSes ;/

[Millie]

It's a consumer proposition that will never work, now that flat-rate monthly fees have taken root for so many years. I don't care how businesses try to justify charging by the minute or hour; no one's going to go for it. Asking consumers, now accustomed to flat rates, to go back to a pay-as-you-go system is like asking people to give up air travel and make exclusive use of trains and boats instead. It just doesn't make sense. You don't suddenly change course and force people to step backward for no good reason. And I'm sorry, but the idea that bandwidth providers are so strapped for cash that they somehow need this additional income is patently absurd. I'm playing my tiniest violin for the AT&Ts of the world right now.

This idea also reeks of "e-mail postage," a concept that was hotly debated on these forums a couple months back. No amount of spam deterrence is worth charging me for my e-mails, IMO.

[Usha Starchild]

Originally Posted by Cybsled

If you actually used the internet back when it was pay-as-you-go, you will pray this never comes to be. Remember when shit like AOL was $4 an hour? Ugh. And don't get me started on local ISPs/BBSes ;/

Well I actually don't remember that, we were fortunate enough to never have AOL force themselfs on us. I actually only used dial up for a short time. Had unlimited access cable in 1997 in Vancouver.

As for bandwidth shortages, I was moslty thinking undersea cables that are working at load right now. Not the intercity stuff in the USA, thats easy to lay and should never be short on bandwidth.

Ask Europeans, australians, asians or anyone who has traveled overseas. Its kinda a shitty experience.

As for the person who said I underestimate my internet usage, I bet I never break 5gb's a month. I surf, use MSN, email. Pretty much nothing else. Stopped playing games last year, never use skype, internet radio, download a mp3 or 2 a month and watch a few youtube vids in the screenshots forum.