| SamuelRSmith said: 250gb? Who /really/ is going to go over it? And even if they do... it's only another $10 per 50gb. I actually think these prices/caps are more than fair. Why should 98% of users suffer while the other 2% are using 10 times the average? |
Bandwidth is not a resource in short supply. Those 98% of users would not be suffering if these charges weren't put into place. The costs of improving our infrastructure are negligible compared to the associated gains made in peak bandwidth, so the prices we pay for internet speed should be DECREASING over time, not increasing alongside the implementation of caps.
Bandwidth costs are literally cheaper than ever. You have Lithuanians getting 300 Mbps for only $35/USD a month, Google bringing GB/s speeds to Kansas City next year, the Japanese getting on average over 60 Mbps way back in 2007, meanwhile AT&T is charging us $50 for a mere 6 Mpbs DSL line, and they're now adding a 150gb cap on top of that. It is absolute and utter bullshit, and it should not be defended.
Also, to all those worrying about corporations "getting away" with this, keep in mind that bandwidth caps directly conflict with the business models of companies like Apple, Microsoft, Sony, Amazon, and Netflix. It won't be long before they get involved in this battle, or hell, they may even start up their own ISPs like Google.
