If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Verizon CEO wants to charge you "a bit more" for actually using your Internet connection   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 62
    More: Obvious, Verizon CEO, Verizon, CEO, internet access, McFadden, Common Cause  
•       •       •

4162 clicks; posted to Geek » on 27 Feb 2014 at 6:22 PM (6 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



62 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-27 06:00:50 PM
Well, I think that internet companies should be able to deliver the service they sold to their customers, but that doesn't stop them.

I'm OK paying-as-I-go for internet, but first they need to get their shiat together and provide us a reasonable internet backbone. There's no reason that major cities shouldn't have South Korea level internet at South Korea prices.
 
2014-02-27 06:26:36 PM
I'm not OK with paying-as-I-go for internet. I have always been a flat fee kind of consumer. Maybe that's because I'm frugal, or maybe that's because I like to be efficient where others are wasteful,it doesn't matter.

I don't pay for that 'Ultimate' label on my internet service to be throttled, ever.
 
2014-02-27 06:28:29 PM
art.penny-arcade.com
 
2014-02-27 06:29:39 PM
Did he even TRY to hide his fangs while he was relating all this bullshiat? 'Pleased' he said. Right. I think you mean he had to sit down at a table in order to hide his erection.
 
2014-02-27 06:34:16 PM

Fubini: Well, I think that internet companies should be able to deliver the service they sold to their customers, but that doesn't stop them.

I'm OK paying-as-I-go for internet, but first they need to get their shiat together and provide us a reasonable internet backbone. There's no reason that major cities shouldn't have South Korea level internet at South Korea prices.


Yes there is. The most important reason of all, to the people who can actually do something about it. Charging customers more for shiattier service means more shareholder/executive profits. And most of our government seems dead set on protecting those big ISPs from any competition.
 
2014-02-27 06:35:41 PM
The US is already paying higher rates for slower speeds compared to overseas.
It makes sense we'd have to pay more to actually use that bandwidth. To a 21st century robber baron, anyway.
 
2014-02-27 06:37:22 PM
"Net neutrality is dead! Let's dance on its corpse! WHOOOOOO! Man, I'm tired... Let's get back to screwing our captive customers with obsolete technology at piddling speeds for exorbitant rates - now, we can tier 'em!"
 - every ISP in the United States

Thanks, Obama!
 
2014-02-27 06:45:59 PM
So...he wants to charge Netflix for being a large bandwidth customer, and then charge me more if I stream Netflix.

Isn't that like having a toll booth at both the entrance and the exit of a turnpike?

Nice setup if you can manage it, I suppose.
 
2014-02-27 06:47:00 PM
I'll guess I'll enjoy it while I can, then build a parabolic wifi antenna from a DirecTV dish to borrow McDonalds/Chili's wifi once I can't afford it. Once I'm in the boonies, I'll do what this guy did (note: ads abound without noscript/adblock)
 
2014-02-27 06:50:36 PM
A bit is 12.5 cents.   If that was all...
 
2014-02-27 06:54:34 PM
Meh, if they start this, I'll just drop streaming all together.  I'm not buying their crappy service.  Last I checked I can still get DVDs in the mail from Netflix.  I'll just drop down to the lowest tier service for the rest of it all.  Fark them in the ear.
 
2014-02-27 07:03:34 PM
If this whole Neutrality crap catches on, it might bring back Blockbuster...
 
2014-02-27 07:09:57 PM

ThoughtSpy: So...he wants to charge Netflix for being a large bandwidth customer, and then charge me more if I stream Netflix.

Isn't that like having a toll booth at both the entrance and the exit of a turnpike?

Nice setup if you can manage it, I suppose.


Turnpikes/Toll roads typically have toll booths at the entrance and exit.

/I think you meant to say pay to enter and exit a turnpike
 
2014-02-27 07:11:56 PM
I think its asinine that Verizon and other carrier want to charge both the customer and the source for a data transfer just because they offer a competing service. Its like them charging you extra to call Dominos because you don't like Verizon's Pizza.
 
2014-02-27 07:19:49 PM
It really is only a matter of time until ISPs return to the idea of charging hourly for internet access, isn't it?
 
2014-02-27 07:21:24 PM
Well, I'm sure if they do that, they'll also come out with a plan for granny who uses a couple megabytes per month to check her email and just charge her like $1/month....right?
 
2014-02-27 07:23:53 PM
If we were as smart as we claim, we would have a nationalized data and power network like we have a national highway network - something that was largely responsible for making America the economic powerhouse it was for the last century.
 
2014-02-27 07:26:48 PM
Is it just me or is Fark loading slower
/Could be FF went to shiat
 
2014-02-27 07:37:36 PM

Prank Call of Cthulhu: Well, I'm sure if they do that, they'll also come out with a plan for granny who uses a couple megabytes per month to check her email and just charge her like $1/month....right?


Most likely it'll be the just a couple dollars cheaper than the current cheapest plan.
 
2014-02-27 07:47:31 PM
I'm in a way glad I have Uverse(FTTN), because they haven't figured out how to cap you yet(if you use their TV service also).
 
2014-02-27 07:52:13 PM
By the Verizon CEO's own logic his taxes should go up because he uses more economy.   If that's the case, I'm ok with this.
 
2014-02-27 08:02:48 PM
RoosterTeeth nailed the problem with ISPs in this week's podcast. The rant starts at ~22:40. Burnie goes from talking about ISP monopolies, to covering the big problem with Netflix caving to Comcast (paying them for a service that people are already paying for).
 
2014-02-27 08:03:35 PM
What websites should do is that, since we're now all allowed to create "content contracts" with various providers, those websites that can should deny service to carriers that haven't paid up for privileged access.

Oh, you're on verizon's network.... well... that'll be extra. You know, because you're chewing up our bandwidth that us WEBSITES are paying for!

Let a few big sites do that to anyone who isn't playing by the net neutrality rules and watch what happens to Verizon's tune.
 
2014-02-27 08:07:26 PM
If you have Verizon for cable or phone switch is you can.

No need to reward those ass-hats.
 
2014-02-27 08:22:17 PM

amoses7178: Let a few big sites do that to anyone who isn't playing by the net neutrality rules and watch what happens to Verizon's tune.


So, Verizon decides to pay those sites. Next, Verizon will increase the rates to the customers because it is a "premium content site". Are you kidding? Why give any ISP a reason to increase their rates when they simply don't care to increase the level of service they provide?

The last thing that should be happening is exactly what Netflix did with Comcast: Pay them to use their network. I absolutely see Netflix increasing the cost of their service in the coming year (and to mask it so it doesn't appear as if it targets specific users, it will be a price increase made to everyone regardless of their ISP). What trend does this set? Now, Netflix is in possible talks with Verizon (and AT&T from what I hear) to pay them also for unthrottled speed?

What this does is have a two-pronged effect: ISPs may very well start charging every website for unthrottled access. Do you think Fark has the profitability to pay Verizon AND Comcast AND AT&T to ensure their access isn't throttled? What about other websites that don't have millions upon millions of paid subscribers, which is the majority of sites visited on the web?

The second problem this creates is that is dissuades smaller content providers from getting into the business. Companies will simply say that it isn't worth it, since they can't afford to pay the fees. It is like there is a big business who sells widgets who pays the mob for protection, and although there is someone else who can provide a better widget, they can't afford to pay the mob, so the mob makes sure that the access to that store is as inconvenient as possible. Netflix is setting the bar to ensure that no other startup can go against them when it comes to accessing their content without throttling or any other obstruction.

THIS is why Net Neutrality is necessary. Not only do you, as well as the content providers, have to pay more to access their sites, but it isn't even like you have a real comparative option to your primary carrier.
 
2014-02-27 08:22:55 PM
Fark Verizon. I'm cutting my service with them at 08:30 Saturday. Can't wait.
 
2014-02-27 08:32:30 PM
Someone somewhere will make a `disguise your traffic and maybe use a proxy` app so people can get full speed on restricted sites.

Any time someone raises prices unfairly, someone else sees a business opportunity...
 
2014-02-27 08:52:53 PM

dready zim: Someone somewhere will make a `disguise your traffic and maybe use a proxy` app so people can get full speed on restricted sites.

Any time someone raises prices unfairly, someone else sees a business opportunity...


Really? Who else provides copper internet to your house?
 
2014-02-27 08:56:42 PM

InterruptingQuirk: I'm not OK with paying-as-I-go for internet. I have always been a flat fee kind of consumer. Maybe that's because I'm frugal, or maybe that's because I like to be efficient where others are wasteful,it doesn't matter.

I don't pay for that 'Ultimate' label on my internet service to be throttled, ever.


If that's what was happening here I wouldn't be upset.

I was on the anti-"Net neutrality" side because the things people were biatching about were not the things that were actually happening. And this still is different from what was predicted. But yeah, this is bad.

Basically no one is going to be able to compete with Netflix without paying a toll, which is going to decrease competition and raise the barrier to entry for any upstart competition.  Isn't that basically when anti-trust law is supposed to jump in and say "fark no"? Hell, maybe the courts were right in striking down the FCC ruling because this should really be an FTC issue. I don't know anymore.
 
2014-02-27 08:59:59 PM

jonny_q: Basically no one is going to be able to compete with Netflix without paying a toll, which is going to decrease competition and raise the barrier to entry for any upstart competition.


media.tumblr.com
 
2014-02-27 09:10:50 PM

szyzk: Fark Verizon. I'm cutting my service with them at 08:30 Saturday. Can't wait.


Welcome to the club! I cut my wireless contract with them and am so glad to be rid of them and with a company that appears to give a shiat.
 
2014-02-27 09:17:08 PM

Prophet of Loss: If we were as smart as we claim, we would have a nationalized data and power network like we have a national highway network - something that was largely responsible for making America the economic powerhouse it was for the last century.


You really want someone like Jan Brewer deciding on how you get your Internet?
 
2014-02-27 09:37:43 PM

meanmutton: Prophet of Loss: If we were as smart as we claim, we would have a nationalized data and power network like we have a national highway network - something that was largely responsible for making America the economic powerhouse it was for the last century.

You really want someone like Jan Brewer deciding on how you get your Internet?


Good point.  It would be like the UK is now...but worse.  Far worse.
 
2014-02-27 09:38:13 PM

LordJiro: Fubini: Well, I think that internet companies should be able to deliver the service they sold to their customers, but that doesn't stop them.

I'm OK paying-as-I-go for internet, but first they need to get their shiat together and provide us a reasonable internet backbone. There's no reason that major cities shouldn't have South Korea level internet at South Korea prices.

Yes there is. The most important reason of all, to the people who can actually do something about it. Charging customers more for shiattier service means more shareholder/executive profits. And most of our government seems dead set on protecting those big ISPs from any competition.


Thread's done, turn out the lights.

Never confused incompetence for indifference, or greed for either.
 
2014-02-27 09:40:24 PM

meanmutton: Prophet of Loss: If we were as smart as we claim, we would have a nationalized data and power network like we have a national highway network - something that was largely responsible for making America the economic powerhouse it was for the last century.

You really want someone like Jan Brewer deciding on how you get your Internet?


Yeah, That's what we call a "non-sequiteur". It means that your proposal doesn't logically follow from the previous statements.

You know what I want? I want a connection company and a content company. I want the connection company to ONLY worry about connecting me - making the best connection, adding links that will improve network performance - these are fairly straightforward things that can be determined when you use something magical called MATH. 

And I want content as well ... but I want the content providers to compete as peers. I don't want any of them to have any control over HOW I get my data. I don't want any of them to be able to 'outbid' the others or pay my data connector company for the right to be faster than their competitors.

Why?

Because I want to choose my content based on how their content is.

And I want to choose my connection on how my connection is.

Since I (and lots and lots and lots of other people) don't have more than one connection company available, it's really just best if we Put them all into the same company that can be operated as a 'utility' for the public good, with a fixed 5-7% guaranteed profit rating. 

And yes, Between the Large operational base and the use of MATH, there is no problem with having a policy wonk run the thing at the regional level (probably don't want to go down to the town or city level ... a county would probably work in most places.
 
2014-02-27 09:55:04 PM
Ugh.

I have a Verizon phone. I've been with them for around 7 years now. I have a Razr Maxx now and I would like to upgrade to a Note 3 or similar. But Verizon keeps pulling shiat like this and I really don't want to support them through it. Plus I currently have an unlimited data plan and if I upgrade without buying the phone outright at full price I'll be forced into getting a data capped plan.

Any advice, fellow farkers?
 
2014-02-27 09:55:32 PM

Drunk Astronaut: meanmutton: Prophet of Loss: If we were as smart as we claim, we would have a nationalized data and power network like we have a national highway network - something that was largely responsible for making America the economic powerhouse it was for the last century.

You really want someone like Jan Brewer deciding on how you get your Internet?

Good point.  It would be like the UK is now...but worse.  Far worse.


The federal government created the internet in the first place.

The federal government farks up a lot of things, but they'd probably have their shiat together with something like this (spying included).
 
2014-02-27 09:58:43 PM
"I think it is only natural that the heavy users help contribute to the investment to keep the web healthy,"

What I learned from the article: Dude refers to "profit growth" as "the web".
 
2014-02-27 09:59:05 PM
jonny_q:Basically no one is going to be able to compete with Netflix without paying a toll, which is going to decrease competition and raise the barrier to entry for any upstart competition.  Isn't that basically when anti-trust law is supposed to jump in and say "fark no"?

While I think there are some major things wrong with this whole deal, I don't quite agree that this would raise the bar to entry and keep out competition.

A) There already is a lot of competition - Crackle, Hulu, Vudu, Amazon, etc
B) Until you already have a userbase, the costs are already extraordinarily high (bandwidth, licensing deals).
 
2014-02-27 09:59:49 PM

drjekel_mrhyde: I'm in a way glad I have Uverse(FTTN), because they haven't figured out how to cap you yet(if you use their TV service also).


U-verse has a 250GB cap, it's just rare that it gets enforced. It isn't difficult at all for them to distinguish between Internet traffic(external) and their VHO traffic(internal).
 
2014-02-27 10:40:38 PM

ThoughtSpy: So...he wants to charge Netflix for being a large bandwidth customer, and then charge me more if I stream Netflix.

 That would be like charging both the person who sends a text AND the person who receives that text! Crazy!
 
2014-02-27 11:14:16 PM

drjekel_mrhyde: I'm in a way glad I have Uverse(FTTN), because they haven't figured out how to cap you yet(if you use their TV service also).


I work for ATT as a tech manager, trust me the company knows just how much comes from the VOD and just how much you are using the internet.  Who sold you that bill of goods?

As another posted, they just do not care very much about enforcing it.

Guess what FTTN is what cable companies use as well, but they can push more bandwidth over old coax than we can over old copper.
 
2014-02-28 12:01:58 AM
How about we make a deal, you get to charge that "little bit" more, just as soon as anyone can pick up the phone or get online and get a 500Mbps fiber connection to their home. Actually forget it, you have six months to start offering completely unrestricted 500Mps fiber connections or you'll be ground to dust.
 
2014-02-28 12:39:57 AM
We pay for the streaming service. 
We pay for the internet service.
We most likely rent the modem.
Steaming service pays for the internet service (oh yes they do.)
Internet service allows bad peering protocols to stifle streaming service without actually "throttling" it, screwing over their customers.
Most Americans too stupid to understand bandwidth speeds and what impacts them so internet services take advantage of that (That fiber internet is great until it turns into a big copper wire at the end of your street to your house).
We are getting screwed by the people we pay to provide a service.
We have legalized prostitution.
 
2014-02-28 12:50:25 AM
His point is entirely valid.  Netflix' business model is based on the assumption that between its source and its customers is free unlimited bandwidth.  That's like expecting to drive to work every day without paying for the maintenance, upgrades, plowing & salt of the roads you drive on.  Vonage, same deal.  All companies that provide Internet service should pay for the cost of the infrastructure necessary to deliver to customers.  Right now, only the cable companies are.

They're overcharging obscenely and providing horrible compressed video, but how many miles of cable has Netflix laid down? Have you ever had a Netflix technician out to your site to hook you up?  Netflix sells you a bandwidth-abuse subscription and Vonage's entire business model assumes your cable modem is working.  When your cable goes out, do you call Netflix?  No.  Do you call Vonage? No.  It's like having a neighbor who parks in your two-car driveway because you have the room, without asking your permission or without paying you.
 
2014-02-28 01:05:31 AM

syrynxx: They're overcharging obscenely and providing horrible compressed video


The only correct thing you've said.
Verizon wants to charge you coming, going, and turning around, and don't even begin to have services to justify it. The infrastructure is already being paid for. Using the road analogy, it's like charging you for needing the road to get to work, and charging your employer for needing you to get to work. And that's just to ensure the road exists. There are also tolls for when you actually use the road.
It's rent-seeking, plain and simple.
 
2014-02-28 01:12:38 AM

syrynxx: His point is entirely valid.  Netflix' business model is based on the assumption that between its source and its customers is free unlimited bandwidth.  That's like expecting to drive to work every day without paying for the maintenance, upgrades, plowing & salt of the roads you drive on.  Vonage, same deal.  All companies that provide Internet service should pay for the cost of the infrastructure necessary to deliver to customers.  Right now, only the cable companies are.

They're overcharging obscenely and providing horrible compressed video, but how many miles of cable has Netflix laid down? Have you ever had a Netflix technician out to your site to hook you up?  Netflix sells you a bandwidth-abuse subscription and Vonage's entire business model assumes your cable modem is working.  When your cable goes out, do you call Netflix?  No.  Do you call Vonage? No.  It's like having a neighbor who parks in your two-car driveway because you have the room, without asking your permission or without paying you.


No its not. The customer already paid for his bandwidth. He can do whatever he wants with it.
 
2014-02-28 03:10:29 AM
I'm sure these additional charges would be applied directly to increasing bandwidth.

/eyeroll

More likely they don't want to spend profits on infrastructure and are using this as a deterrent.
 
2014-02-28 08:29:24 AM

CtrlAltDestroy: Ugh.

I have a Verizon phone. I've been with them for around 7 years now. I have a Razr Maxx now and I would like to upgrade to a Note 3 or similar. But Verizon keeps pulling shiat like this and I really don't want to support them through it. Plus I currently have an unlimited data plan and if I upgrade without buying the phone outright at full price I'll be forced into getting a data capped plan.

Any advice, fellow farkers?


Check out Swappa. It's the secondary market for phones, so you'll pay more than if you upgrade. However, you never have to sign a contract and you keep your unlimited plan.
 
2014-02-28 08:48:50 AM

syrynxx: Netflix' business model is based on the assumption that between its source and its customers is free unlimited bandwidth.


Huh, so I'm sending Cox cable $90 a month or so for no damned reason?  It could be free!
 
Displayed 50 of 62 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report