Should all internet subscribers pay per bit?

[Occulus]

When answering, remember this: in order for the billed amount to be 100% accurate, the ISP would have to somehow account for each and every transferred bit.

[spyderchao]

1. Fuck No

It costs absolutely nothing extra to send more bytes. It's nonsensical to force people to pay for different bandwidths as they already do. They have simply figured out that people are getting more of their news online especially from videos which of course are relatively large data transfers. If they can make it too expensive to access a large amount of data we will be less well informed and therefore less inclined to realize when we are being screwed and thus less inclined to do anything about it. This is just more corporate fascism.

[Tesha]

5. In what dream world is data bandwidth actually free for the provider? (NT)

[spyderchao]

8. I didn't say it was free.

I said it costs an ISP nothing EXTRA to get everyone the fastest connection their current tubes can handle. I know those tubes cost money.

[Tesha]

11. But your statement is logically inconsistent.

If bandwidth isn't free, then it isn't free for the provider
to give everyone the fastest possible pipe.

Tesha

[KharmaTrain]

12. Most Video Watchers...

...aren't watching news. They're watching some stupid cat play a piano or porn or downloading the entire Led Zeppelin collection or full-length movies. Those people consume a lot more bandwidth than someone who is browsing news sites or playing with FaceTwitter. While I prefer an ala carte system where bandwidth is unlimited for all, it does have a value to it and those who use large volume (like electricity) should pay more for for tying down the networks. I know several heavy duty downloaders who can and do slow down service for others connected to their network and even to their area.

That said, I have been and continue to be against any restrictions on the bandwidth...but it is a finite commodity (despite what some may think) and does have a value and those who use the most should pay more.

[tridim]

2. Pay-per-whatever will destroy the intent and spirit of Internet.

So, hell no.

And, pay per bit means every banner advertisement I see will cost ME money, video ads would be even worse. Double hell no.

[Electric Monk]

10. Information wants to be free. nt

[brooklynite]

13. So you'll happily pay more...

for unlimited service when the ISP needs to invest in more capacity to support growing demand from more users and larger media files?

I personally prefer unlimited pricing, but it's not an emotional choice.

[baldguy]

3. Broadband access on public airwaves should be free.

Like access to public roads is.

[joshcryer]

7. I agree. Thankfully we will have SuperWifi soon, it is a shame the telecoms on the rest...

...of the spectrum.

[Tesha]

4. No, but reasonable caps on bandwidth consumption are, well, reasonable. (NT)

[The Straight Story]

6. Is that like paying a hooker per thrust versus per session?

If so, I need to finish my 'downloads' more quickly :)

[Morning Dew]

9. only the naughty bits, I think. n/m