Rank: Admin
Groups: Administration
Joined: 10/20/2007
Posts: 1,525
Points: 3,139
|
|
Rank: One of the Main Weird
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/23/2008
Posts: 359
Points: 501
Location: UK, Tonbridge
|
Very interesting, watching the video was confusing as the bad guys here that want this tiered cost of the internet sounded like the good guys who didn't want the government to get in and create a mass of extra rules etc fiddling with the internet.
Hearing the AT&T chairmans question about why companies should be able to use his pipes for free it sounds logical that websites should pay for access. And then I think, wait a moment, that's double paying. The websites like Youtube are just destinations on the internet, they don't talk to each other.
The way I see it is its us the users that pay to use the internet, no one has a free connection, so if someone is using up too much bandwidth for the price AT&T are free to raise the price and the user is free to move elsewhere. Google style giving preference to certain types of website sounds scummy, its starting to annoy me enough in a search engine as it is.
|
Rank: Admin
Groups: Administration
Joined: 10/20/2007
Posts: 1,525
Points: 3,139
|
Lomax wrote:Very interesting, watching the video was confusing as the bad guys here that want this tiered cost of the internet sounded like the good guys who didn't want the government to get in and create a mass of extra rules etc fiddling with the internet.
Hearing the AT&T chairmans question about why companies should be able to use his pipes for free it sounds logical that websites should pay for access. And then I think, wait a moment, that's double paying. The websites like Youtube are just destinations on the internet, they don't talk to each other.
The way I see it is its us the users that pay to use the internet, no one has a free connection, so if someone is using up too much bandwidth for the price AT&T are free to raise the price and the user is free to move elsewhere. Google style giving preference to certain types of website sounds scummy, its starting to annoy me enough in a search engine as it is. Couldn't agree more on your first paragraph. We (consumers) are gonna get bent over either way. Creating a website preferance system will kill small sites. I pay out of pocket for this site's hosting, if I had to pay more than that for transport bandwidth on top of hosting bandwidth, this site wouldn't exist.
|
