Not to mention the cost to the consumer of advertising. Right now, in the unlimited model, advertising is free, meaning we get to see flashy ads on every page.
Throttle down the bandwidth consumption with caps and ads become more than an eyesore, they become an expense for the consumer. Cheers, Ron Watson http://k9disc.blip.tv http://k9disc.com http://discdogradio.com http://pawsitivevybe.com On Feb 13, 2008, at 3:01 PM, Jay dedman wrote: > > Wouldn't it still be better for ISPs to be able to offer preferred > > service over a 2nd tiered network to those willing to pay for it > > though? For example, if vonage wanted to make sure they were > offering > > high quality phone service, they might be willing to pay more. or > if a > > hospital wanted to perform operations by distance using robotics > > (telesurgery?) and needed to ensure they had a reliable connection. > > This would encourage innovation, investment and competition. > > agreed. > They do charge for higher bandwidth now. ( i pay extra for a higher > upload speed) > > I can see them charging for bandwdith caps as well....but this will > certainly stifle innovation and commercialism. > Can you imagine having a bandwidth cap, going to a website, and having > to make a decision if you want to load the page/video/audio? > every click becomes a decision so new players will likely get less > play. > (ask anyone who uses satellite internet with a monthly 1000mb > traffic limit) > > > It's hard to believe ISPs would slow down the internet for everyone > > else just because certain companies want better service. Comcast is > > already demonstrating that the opposite is true. TV networks are > > offering shows via torrents but Comcast is willing to slow them down > > in order to provide better service for the general public. > > what is NBC tells Comcast, "yo, we'll pay you 50million each year to > give us higher priority. (also, can you slow down ABC?)" > > > If an ISP started sending packets to the end of the line for > > anti-competitive reasons, wouldn't this be against the law anyway? > > great question. > I know of no law saying that Comcast cant do that now. > They are private company and can do anything they want. > (i hope im wrong so please double fact check me) > > Jay > > -- > http://jaydedman.com > 917 371 6790 > Professional: http://ryanishungry.com > Personal: http://momentshowing.net > Photos: http://flickr.com/photos/jaydedman/ > Twitter: http://twitter.com/jaydedman > RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9 > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
