Replies

For those of you who may not comprehend... The amount of data being used is exploding. In the last 6 years, the amount of data EACH customer uses on average, has gone up somewhere between 10 and 15 fold. Despite billions and billions being poured into the cellular and cellular like data systems, the wireless systems IN NO WAY are keeping up with demand. And it is NOT a matter of ‘gouging’ anyone, it’s a matter of inability to make technology meet the growing demand for media and infotainment.

Despite what the whiners for net neutrality may say, the tiered structure, with different pricing for each type of service, maybe the way to SAVE internet by wireless phone, instead of making the price up until demand falls, and NO services are affordable by wireless.

It will reduce the load on the overloaded systems, and at the same time, reduce the level of data hungry application demand, thereby making data by phone remain reasonable in price.

Or, you could listen to those who think that government is the solution to every problem - they are NOT CORRECT.

And our enemies both foreign and domestic see America as a very opportunistic target, practically over ripe to the point of falling from the tree, almost at the junction that if an EMP device were to be detonated anywhere in the CONUS it would shatter this new conversion to data availability in a heartbeat, this instant rush of false power and confidence in this wealth of high speed devices that deliver all the various worlds of pseudo-reality and fantasy.

We are becoming nothing more than bees living in our version of a high tech bee hive.

And our enemies have the smoker...

Sooo... We are getting a crappy tiered internet because telecoms triple charge users and made taxpayer pay for their infrastructure?

That sounds reasonable.

Having taxpayers bailout large businesses for their expenses is called what again?

The FCC should be regulating the flow of traffic like it always has. Never content.

Then the companies charge more for the more bandwidth consumed.

Internet bandwidth is a commodity, it’s not going to be any different from AT&T versus Comcast versus Verizon.

So why are the internet companies trying to use a beautique pricing scheme? Oooh, if you go to Facebook it’s costs XX, but Myspace is YY, and YouTube is ZZ.

It’s all the same 0’s and 1’s, it’s just that some places use more than others.

At the start of the dial-up era, internet pricing was handled that way. And when the capacity caught up, then you started to see the ‘unlimited internet’ packages. So either the industry’s business leaders are incredibly stupid, or they have decided that the old business model, which handled the exact situation you’ve described... is not good enough.