View Full Version : SAVE the internet!!!
rickdugan
03-20-2015, 07:08 AM
One last post on this topic and then I am done...
As a matter of principle, I am against most regulation that interferes with free market forces and I disagree with the notion that governments do almost anything better than free enterprise. But, truth be told, this was never an open system to begin with. Local and state governments, and even the federal government, were complicit in establishing the monopoly positions held by cable and telephone companies. This made perfect sense at the respective times, since someone needed to string telephone and cable lines, someone needed to replace rabbit ears with cable boxes and someone needed to retain ongoing responsibility for maintaining and repairing the physical infrastructure (lines, junctions, etc.). The only realistic way to accomplish these initial build-outs was to allow single providers to take responsibility for whole regions.
So now here we are. Monopolies and duopolies have strangleholds on high speed Internet access with no end in sight. The barriers to entry for any new wired competition are exceedingly high, since new roll-out must be negotiated on a town by town basis. There is not nearly enough wireless spectrum to allow for alternative wireless competition and, oh yeah, the same two telephone companies control most of that as well. Satellite technology is a long way away from serving as any meaningful competition. The one bright-ish spot in the whole landscape is Google Fiber, but that is several years away from being meaningful for almost anyone, if it ever becomes such at all since they face the same barriers to entry as an other wired provider.
There are no easy answers to be sure. I am loathe to see any business converted into a utility by the government, but our current Internet providers certainly have the same control as most utilities.
eagle2
03-20-2015, 07:44 PM
^^^ Verizon FIOS for one. However, Verizon has purposefully halted the expansion of FIOS service as a result of the 'uncertainties' associated with net neutrality rules and pending lawsuit decisions. Arguably, Verizon was able to offer cheap high speed internet access via FIOS because their near non-existant profit margin from FIOS ISP service alone was 'subsidized' via increased sales of FIOS related programming packages. The new FCC rules, and pending lawsuits, obviously threaten the existing Verizon 'internal cross subsidy' arrangement ... potentially rendering further investment in FIOS service expansion to be a 'losing proposition' for Verizon stockholders. See http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Verizon-Again-Confirms-No-Future-FiOS-Expansion-121365
FIOS doesn't offer high-speed internet service for $20 a month. I just went to their site to look at special offers. For high-speed internet service, they're offering it for $54.99 a month for a two year agreement, plus taxes, equip. charges & other fees.
Melonie
03-21-2015, 03:56 AM
^^^ they DID offer high-speed internet service for $20 a month as part of a bundle which also included programming service. Many Cable TV companies offered the same for high-speed cable modem internet service. In both cases, an 'internal cross-subsidy' was being used i.e. providing high-speed internet service 'at cost' in order to generate a high profit margin from the bundled programming sales. As was already pointed out, 'net neutrality' related lawsuits began to bring the ( continuing ) legality of such 'internal cross subsidy' business models into question several years ago ... which dissuaded investors from expanding FIOS service territory. The most recently released FCC 'net neutrality' regulations appear to officially ban 'internal cross subsidy' business models.
From the standpoint of a typical customer, the resulting changes can mean that ... instead of spending $50 a month ( or whatever ) on high speed internet service bundled with programming services a few years ago, the customer now gets to spend $50 a month for ( premium ) high speed internet service alone plus another $10 ( or whatever ) for programming services from a 3rd party source like Netflix. The customer may also have available, and may accept, a lower priced internet service level. However, that lower priced internet service level already may not be capable of delivering speeds sufficient to stream HD video ( from Netflix or adult webcams ) at all times ... and may become less and less capable of delivering glitch free HD streaming video as time goes by and internet backbone traffic levels increase while internet backbone capacity remains the same.
The FCC declaring internet service to be a 'public utility' makes possible the official classification of different internet service levels, and the setting of different price levels for those services. Arguably, as internet backbone congestion levels increase, the FCC and the 'last mile' providers will have no choice but to start offering the present day equivalent of $20 per month consumer level internet service ( at speeds which will not support glitch free video streaming ), and offering the present day equivalent of $50 per month 'business class' level internet service ( at speeds which CAN support glitch free video streaming ).
If and when this happens, it will arguably be a 'double whammy' for camgirls ... both in terms of their own monthly internet service costs, but more importantly in terms of internet service costs for their customers. How many husbands will choose not to pay extra for 'business class' high speed internet service because they don't want to explain to their wives why they want / need it ? How many college dorm rooms / apartments etc. will stick with 'consumer' level internet service because the college / landlord won't pony up the extra bucks ? As a result, how many husbands, college students etc. will cease being paying webcam customers once their 'consumer' class internet service starts hiccupping and buffering a camgirl's video stream ?
eagle2
03-21-2015, 09:24 AM
No, if you want a bundling service from FIOS, you have to pay $75 - $100 a month. If you want internet only, it's $54.99 a month.
You don't know that internet service is going to get worse for anyone. You're just assuming that because you disagree with the decision. I doubt cam-girls will see any difference.
salzsieder67
03-21-2015, 04:32 PM
No-one knows for sure that internet service is going to get worse, but it is a reasonable assumption. Companies are already very slow to upgrade the infrastructure even though there is some ROI currently. Internet usage is growing every year, faster than systems are being upgraded.
Don't forget there are still areas of the country relegated to using modems to connect to the internet, unless the customer has opted get a satellite service of some sort. This is because companies say the expense of providing higher quality service to those areas will not be recovered by revenue that would be generated by those areas. If the ISPs think that the new regulations make upgrading systems in more densely populated areas unprofitable they won't, but growth in usage will not slow down until well after those decisions are reached. Thereby leading to a degradation in levels of service.
Melonie
03-21-2015, 06:09 PM
if you want a bundling service from FIOS, you have to pay $75 - $100 a month. If you want internet only, it's $54.99 a month.
^^^ this is now ( i.e. after Verizon has pretty much already given up on marketing FIOS), that was then ( when Verizon was still actively trying to lure new customers away from cable and wireless providers to FIOS )
Again, in the SHORT term, it is unlikely that camgirls, webcam customers, or anyone else will see a significant change in service. However, long term forces have arguably been set in motion which will lead to an across the board decline in internet backbone speeds once growth in internet bandwidth usage reaches 100% of existing internet capacity. At that point, ALL internet users will see a progressively worsening slowdown.
I would further speculate that, when that future point arrives, it will then be up to the FCC to come up with a plan to belatedly fund internet backbone capacity improvements which the Verizons, Comcasts etc. stopped making on their own.
I'm also agreeing with Rick that a prolonged discussion, with very little information to go on other than the certain knowledge that future court decisions will actually determine future direction, is probably not going to accomplish much at this time. So I'll leave off with the observation that, if nothing else, the new FCC regulations have introduced an element of future 'uncertainty' for camgirls.
salzsieder67
03-24-2015, 02:37 PM
The first of the lawsuits have been filed.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/24/us-usa-internet-neutrality-idUSKBN0MJ2DP20150324