| (Pages: 1, 2) | |
Copy Clerk  Posts: 55 Joined: 27 Jun 2008     | |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 2770 Joined: 13 Feb 2008     | Fire always works. |
King of the Yetis  Posts: 2539 Joined: 15 Jul 2008   | Pitchforks too. |
Copy Clerk Posts: 55 Joined: 27 Jun 2008 | Ah the "Burn the Witch" approach |
Pulitzer Laureate  Posts: 741 Joined: 12 Apr 2008   | Theres also the domestic terrorist approach. |
Press Junketeer  Posts: 439 Joined: 14 Aug 2008     | well me personally i would douse their cars in acid to make them all grey and weird looking (or just not there (depends on the acid), you could just go find teh house of one of the highest ppl in the ISP industry and ask them (at gunpoint if you wish) why is there a data limit, and if possible how you could fix it then and there with a few words. you may now begin to call me crazy and a bit of a lunatic (my friends do (and all i do is run around in halo or CoD4 doing things that normally are IMPOSSIBLE in those games) "humans use the word "impossible" far to much" quote from i forget who but i like it |
Press Junketeer Posts: 439 Joined: 14 Aug 2008 | and lets avoid being the unibomber plz ppl that didnt work out so well for said person |
Press Junketeer Posts: 439 Joined: 14 Aug 2008 |
hes dead right? |
Copy Clerk Posts: 55 Joined: 27 Jun 2008 | i think so, and tho i appreciate the vehemence, ideas on how to actually influence corporate decision making on this issue would be really good too |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 3664 Joined: 21 Jan 2008    | You do know in Australia that the internet providers either offer you data limits... actually you've always got a data limit, but it either comes down to paying extra for everything over the download limit, or getting capped. I myself prefer the capped option, simply because I don't like spending the extra money. As for the question... what do you propose? I'm a little confused by what you're asking, and well, what alternatives are there? If you want to remove data limits, what do you suggest to the ISPs so they still make a profit? It's not that I'm opposed to what you're saying, but that I'm not too sure how this is going to work. |
Muckraker  Posts: 246 Joined: 6 Aug 2008  | The ISPs are still maintaining a profit margin without data limits, otherwise we'd already have them or have no internet at all. The reason for the cap from Comcast is because the small minority disrupts service to the majority with their excessive downloading. It's just how cable internet access works, it's a distributed bandwidth network, it works great as long as you don't have too many users on one trunk or don't have a couple power users, but since the amount of bandwidth is finite per trunk once it's used up it causes slowdown for everyone on that trunk. DSL is another beast altogether, bandwidth is per line instead of being distributed, so a DSL user can max out his bandwidth all day and not affect anyone else using the service. The only real complaint I have with caps is that utilities in general are moving toward unlimited plans, not caps. Caps are a thing of the past and this sort of move is really a step backwards. One could also argue that cable companies that are planning to cap bandwidth are doing so to protect their interests in their content delivery cable divisions. With a bandwidth cap a user is going to be much less likely to utilize an online service to get HD video and more likely to partake in whatever offering the cable company they have their internet through offers. |
Copy Clerk Posts: 55 Joined: 27 Jun 2008 | Yes of course Stompy, i'm on capped plan which as i say i breach every month, at which point they slow me down but remove the data limit such that i can do a few large files without affecting my quota, provided i dont want to do anything else online at the same time (15kbs is unbelievably sloooooow)if i were uncapped i would endup paying hundreds more a month, some providers charge as much as 50c a meg over the data limit, and they all slow you down or cut you off eventually. my understanding of the problem is this: in much of the rest of the world data limits are either non existent or so large as to be ignorable. I believe that data limits are limiting Australians capacity to fully take advantage of our digital revolution, and that this limiting will actually do harm to the competitiveness of our economy and education systems. On a more selfish level, I'm happy to buy games and film online in fact i really want to be able to do it more often but i hate being stuck with slow internet for half the month when i do. I'm at a bit of a loss on how to do it, but i'm sure there is some quite simple way to encourage ISP's to lift or altogether remove limits, and i'm pretty sure the first ones to do so will make a ton of money from new customers as well. Also just hoping to spur some discussion on the topic, thanks for the contribution |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 2174 Joined: 2 Aug 2006    | Those caps are in place because if they weren't you'd have all your bandwidth sucked up by your neighbor's relentless illegal downloads. You can lobby to get them removed, but don't expect better bandwidth if you're successful. If anything, you'll be complaining even more when your 250kbps falls to 25kbps. In this particular case, you might have wanted to shop around some more. Sounds like Optus doesn't have the bandwidth to spare. |
Paperboy  Posts: 14 Joined: 4 Sep 2008     | Here is a Little education for u: As most of the Net is not in AU there is a large amount of traffic that has to go via the Submarine cable network: So chances are if you are hitting a US server or source you are going thru one of these guys at some point and using this network. enjoy |
Copy Clerk Posts: 55 Joined: 27 Jun 2008 | Nice links thank you, |
Paperboy Posts: 14 Joined: 4 Sep 2008 | I've been a long time user of Internode, while they are not as cheap as they use to be there products are good and there service is great. there are bigger things to worry about atm: it's very scary & it's already been funded for the next 5 years! 128 mill over 5 years. enjoy |
Copy Clerk Posts: 55 Joined: 27 Jun 2008 | Good Lord, the very idea, i heard about this a while back but i thought they had been forced to acknowledge just how ridiculous a proposal it really is. Ah well the stupidity of politicians should never be underestimated. on the other note yes ive heard internode are pretty good, for a long time telstra and optus were the only real options around here and optus's cable was the fastest but iinet and their ADSL 2+ are deffinetly getting my business soon. |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 3664 Joined: 21 Jan 2008 | Actually, how does the net work in other countries? Sorry, but I've only know the piss-poor internet that is found in Australia. I have an inkling that some of you guys have fibre-optics, but how does it work for the rest of the world? |
Beat Writer Posts: 209 Joined: 16 Jun 2008 | The real problem with .au is that there are only 2 major providers (one of which doesn't cover anywhere near as much as the other) of major infrastructure that the internet needs. I'm not just talking about those submarine pipes (although obviously they factor in too) but all the communications and networking stuff. The two companies that run this are greedy bastards that will charge for users to use this service. They paid the initial costs to build and install that infrastructure. They have to regain the costs. Yes, once they've made back what it cost, they *should* switch over to a less demanding payment structure, like say, a low flat rate for unlimited monthly use, but they wont. Why? Because, as said above, they're Greedy Bastards. Profits mean nice big yearly bonuses for the executives and board members. We're talking bonuses in the realm of up to tens of million of dollars. Now, those executives could change everything so that they get less profits, and have no data limits (or a flat rate for rental of ports/lines). This will cut into their bonuses though. Which path do you think they'll take? I'll give you 3 guesses :) tl;dr: It sux, but they want the profits it generates, and there ain't nothing that will change that, ever. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 2019 Joined: 25 Jun 2008  | Could it be something to do with the idea that more data available = more piracy & downloading of music & films etc.? By imposing data limits the ISP are helping their "sister" companies by limiting the amount people can pirate their property. It's probably very rare for a ISP to be a stand alone company, they're probably part of a larger group which includes music & film companies, (isn't AOL connected to Time-Warner?) so they have a vested interest in limiting piracy. I don't really know, but that's my wild stab in the dark. |
Press Junketeer  Posts: 414 Joined: 9 Jul 2008  | Because bandwidth caps are not yet the norm here in America, I prefer the 'DOn't give them your business' approach. I just dropped Comcast on its sorry ass when I found out I could get FiOS. Now I have no throttling, no caps, and a dedicated line so my speed is consistant |
Copy Clerk Posts: 55 Joined: 27 Jun 2008 | Yes, the two major providers are greedy bastards, yes limiting data may have been an excuse to help stop piracy, BUT I'm switching to a provider that is at least slightly more generous and the more people that do this the greater the pressure on the two major providers will be to alter their behavior. So apart from simply switching provider, an option not available to many Aussies, does anyone know who it would most benefit us to lobby or petition? |
Paperboy Posts: 14 Joined: 4 Sep 2008 | The 2 Providers is just an issue that comes out of have Telstra as the only telephone company for a vary long time, been gov run. in Reality there is now lots of ISP and back bone providers but the Average Joe will no go past Telstra as that is all they have know for the greater part of there life. As for internode, they are child company of Agile, which is a back bone provider. And if you go an ADSL2+ connection from the the only thing that they rent from Telstra/Optus is the Local loop(from memory taht is the team, it is the copper pair from eh exchange to the house. Another big this is that Telstra has always Charged for upload, and so a lot of ISP also do this. Node dose not, I think optus still dose, but it's an discussing policy that is designed to strip thru ur DL limit as fast as posible. I also used Nodes Priority plan when it was about, basically there was a pool of users that had there own pile to the net (as not to affect normal custoemrs) and you got an index based on how much you had DL'd in the last 7 days. The person with the high's index had the lowest Priority over the pipe to the net, the person with the lowest index had the highest Priority. This would mean if the pipe was not at heavy use and you had a high index you still got full speed, but during peek times you could be pushed back (how much I can not remember but I think too as low as 1/4 of full speed) but if you end up with a high index backing off for 36~48hr's normally dropped you back to a point where you where not notici8ng the lack of Priority. Looking back at my Dl's for the months on that it when 30gb then 60gb then 30gb then 60gb, etc. Want to know more about ISP in AU or looking at changing then look here: enjoy |
Press Junketeer Posts: 439 Joined: 14 Aug 2008 |
they should burn in the deepest pits of hell for all eternity......i think they get a kick out of pissing us little ppl off, and they get mad when we shoot one of them... |
Copy Clerk Posts: 55 Joined: 27 Jun 2008 | http://www.whirlpool.net.au/ |
Paperboy Posts: 14 Joined: 4 Sep 2008 | I've started another thread as not to high jack ur thread :D http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.70623#697497 Edi: wow looked up getup, looks like the bomb, cool stuff |
Copy Clerk Posts: 55 Joined: 27 Jun 2008 | your welcome thanks for participating |
Copy Clerk Posts: 55 Joined: 27 Jun 2008 | It's an interesting and valid idea, and i would certainly consider it perhaps not as the first approach. Still a valid option, it takes a lot of users to achieve tho yes? still practical, i like it thanks for the contribution. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1431 Joined: 19 Jun 2008  | The biggest problem down here is that telscum owns most of the infrastructure, even though taxpayers paid for it, and they like to maintain profits that give the american running the damned company a 30+ million a year paycheque. Unless we can force the government to provide unlimited access to all internet service providers, nothing is going to change. Much like our lack of an r18+ category for games (cos we can't let the little children near anything that might harm their fragile little minds). |
Infamous Scribbler  Posts: 597 Joined: 27 Mar 2008    | I agree this is a huge problem for me. I am with AAPT on an 18gb cap. Thr price is not ridiculous but i always get capped especialy having six internet users in the house and five computers. |
Pulitzer Laureate  Posts: 849 Joined: 5 Aug 2008  | Man, I had no idea that you had such a low cap in Australia. I just recently switched to fiber-optics from Verizon here in the US and its mega fast, but I'm not sure what the cap is if there is one. I previously had Comcast but their new cap of 250gb is still pretty generous. On the piracy issue, I'm not really sure why everyone thinks piracy is the reason they are capping you. The OP said his limit is 15gb, and that is a perfectly reachable limit from legitimate downloads. I must hit 20-30gb a month in legitimate downloads alone. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 3214 Joined: 10 Nov 2007     | The only way to counter bandwidth limitations is amssive infrastructure upgrades. ADSL and Cable is at the physical limit of it's capacity in many places, and FTTH is expensive to invest in so no-one wants to install it widespread. |
IT Director  Posts: 1549 Joined: 13 Jun 2002   |
Do NOT do this, and if anyone else suggests anything similar they won't be posting here any more. |
Muckraker  Posts: 258 Joined: 3 Sep 2008   | With a marsupial. |
| (Pages: 1, 2) | |
Reply to Thread
|
|
Not registered? Sign up for a free account! |
I'm starting this thread here hoping to tap into the gaming brainstrust that the escapist encapsulates.
I'm looking for ideas on how we can encourage/force bandwidth providers to acknowledge that data really shouldn't be what they are charging for, speed fine, but data No.
A breakdown of the problem:
In Australia data limits are the norm, and i don't mean the 250gig variety that caused so much fuss in the blogosphere recently (Comcast). I'm talking major ISPs in this part of the world offering so called broadband plans starting at one to five gig a month for $20 to $50, all the while fully aware that new customers operating systems are going to breach that limit running updates in the background.
I have a $70 a month cable plan from Optus which grants me 15gig and limits my speed to 15kbs once that limit is breached. Which it is every damn month. I am swapping to an ADSL 2+ 60gig plan for $80 a month as soon as i can afford the $350 it will cost me to break contract with optus and get connected to iinet. I suspect that even that will not satisfy me, tho its a definite improvement.
What i really want are some good ideas on how we can encourage our ISP's to recognize that at the same time all our media (especially our games) are encouraging us to consume data they (the ISPs) are punishing us for doing so.
Data limits have a number of negative flow on effects including but not limited too:
-open access WiFi is rare and limited here, something i noticed in Europe is wifi is everywhere.
-Data limits slowdown uptake so fewer people are signing up which encourages providers to keep prices higher to cover costs and make profit.
-Limits the introduction of new technologies, We were a long way behind the rest of the world in the introduction of XBox Live etc. And we are unlikely to see the Kindle here anytime in the near future as Amazon wants unlimited data available for it.
So any ideas?