Wireless Carriers Openly Considering Charging per Service

[Ashbringer]

ISP hypocrisy knows no bounds.

As people here have stated "Go find another ISP" - at what point do the lines between the ISPs disappear and the options are "have internet and get to deal with the nickel and diming" or "don't have internet."

People who live in remote areas are pretty much dealing with a monopoly, as they're lucky to get any internet there. That is something you usually get involved with the community. You know, have meetings and what not.

Once some of these companies get away with murder it then becomes open season for the rest to.

I thought the way it worked was that the companies held secret meetings, and they'll use one company as the guinea pig. If the guinea pig does relatively well, then all the companies will do it.

I hope that when public outcry gets large enough the governments will start discussions on regulating this practice forcing the ISP's to adjust their offerings in order to keep control.

The problem is that the government is in bed with these corporations. That's why cable companies lobby. Money isn't the root of all evil, lobbying is.

Finding another ISP is already silly to say, since there's usually only one cable option and one DSL option in any given area... . DSL can't even offer the speeds I want.
In my area, we used to have lots of options for ISP's. Now, it's generally down to two, Verizon and Cablevision. I do have FIOS, but if I wanted DSL, it'll have to be through Verizon. AT&T has a much better deal with DSL, but they're not here.

Right now, Verizon and Cablevision fight each other vigorously. That's good, that's capitalism, but it won't be long before they start working with each other, to price fix.

Realistically, we're afraid companies are going to price fix. Cause if one ISP did charge per service, the customers would abandon them, and they'd go bankrupt. So no other ISP would do it. Then again, what if the other ISPs are working with them, and waiting for the green light?

Yeah... and world peace will erupt suddenly, with cures for cancer raining from the sky... i.e. not happening.

 

[GoldenTiger]

Right now, Verizon and Cablevision fight each other vigorously. That's good, that's capitalism, but it won't be long before they start working with each other, to price fix.

FIght eachother how? Cablevision and Verizon FIOS aren't both available in my hometown, and in my current living area there's Comcast with no Verizon either.

 

[Uncle]

Blah blah end of the world blah blah.

If you don't like the service stop paying for it.
When enough people stop paying for it things will change.
If you keep paying then apparently you like it.
Yes you do have a choice.

I canceled my cable over a year ago. Every few months they phone and offer me a better deal then the last. Two weeks ago they offered me free cable for the next six months. I said no thanks. I told them I want them to quit telling me what I want and to give me what I want, and that is a choice of channels that I can pick vs their fu_cked up packages. As long as people continue to cancel their cable I don't think their going to have much choice. I keep reminding them of this big pipeline going into my house that is empty and how they have lost me as part of their cash flow. I still think they want your money more then you think you need their cable, so use that to your advantage. These company's treat everyone like their addicts, and maybe there right because the new generation of kids only know what they have been spoon fed by these assholes. Most kids have no concept of what else to do with there lives other then to connect with the world electronically.

 

[Methadras]

Now you guys know why net neutrality at is very basic is important in this regard. If ISP's are treated like dump pipe providers, then they won't be able to charge for this shit unless they raise their fees to get you onto the internet to begin with.

 

[sixpac]

Blah blah end of the world blah blah.

If you don't like the service stop paying for it.
When enough people stop paying for it things will change.
If you keep paying then apparently you like it.
Yes you do have a choice.

Exactly, and if this does happen I'll be choosing not to pay and remove all data off my phone.

 

[celeron300]

I'll just go to my only source on the internet [H]!

 

[dr.kevin]

ah. there they go.

nickel and diming shit again.

is this what they teach in Harvard B-school?

 

[dr.kevin]

on second thought, this might be a good idea....... as a deterrent.

maybe douchebags will be less likely to twit-while-driving.
get those eyes unglued from the phone.

 

[WaltC]

They should do it. Seriously.

I would love to see how people retaliate, and how people figure out how to get around this.

Exactly. If they try something like this, it doesn't mean you are forced to accept it, does it? Why the complaining about milk not yet spilled--I will never know. But it sure seems the net neutrality crowd is all about scaring itself silly with "What if this happens? What if that happens?" fear mongering. It's a bit pathetic.

 

[gathagan]

I foresee a semi-return to the "good ol days". Back when high-speed was relegated to ISDN and T1s, a lot of people would simply all chip in and one would buy the service and hub out to all of the neighbors.

With 802.11 so cheap now, i can see communities having their own service to a backbone provider and Wifi out as part of the HOA fee.

Which will do nothing to change the situation.
It's the backbone provider that will be charging them in this fashion.

 

[Deleted member 201992]

If there is only ONE thing that people need to all unite for it's COMPLETE net neutrality.

 

[Cerulean]

If there is only ONE thing that people need to all unite for it's COMPLETE net neutrality.

Yeah, like that's going to happen. I bet most of the populace doesn't even know what that is, or this situation.

 

[thyshallsmite]

Quite a few places have a monoply, the option of o just switch isn't an option at all, in fact just this month At&t increased there rates i have the "choice" of paying it or going without internet. We already pay outrages costs for crappy service because these guys have sections neatly divided up and don't compete with each other we shouldn't be giving any slack to these bottom feeders, feed these fuckers to the wolves and see if it makes em actually try to care about their customers.

 

[kac77]

Exactly. If they try something like this, it doesn't mean you are forced to accept it, does it? Why the complaining about milk not yet spilled--I will never know. But it sure seems the net neutrality crowd is all about scaring itself silly with "What if this happens? What if that happens?" fear mongering. It's a bit pathetic.

Those people who have Comcast and Comcast only would disagree with you. The Internet is becoming a commodity. Going for a job? Try submitting that resume via the post office with just a land line phone number as a from of contact vs. other applicants which submit via email or PDF and include many other ways to be reached. It wasn't too long ago that people who didn't take notice were saying things like "2GB per month (for phone) is more than enough for Internet access... who could possibly blow through that?" If you have an XBox, Steam, PS3, or Netflix account you know damn well how easy it is to blow through that amount of data. As more internet products come on line (can't wait till those cloud services come on line) and speeds get faster which will produce products that take more and more bandwidth do you really think that a year or two from now that the data cap will still be seen as reasonable? How long do you think MS will offer Office as a standalone installation?

Paying per service or per domain is why the push towards cloud services is so big, or getting to be.You'll pay once for "access" then more per service then again for preferential access to something that "access" is already giving you. Even if ALL of the above isn't an argument that you can accept there still is the problem of them asking for additional money for no reason at all. There's isn't a Facebook RAS solution that needs to be installed at an additional cost on the part of the service provider in order for you to reach Facebook. You can reach it NOW, TODAY, PRESENTLY with NO ADDITIONAL CHARGE AT ALL and net neutrality is what does or did that. They are attempting to extract additional money just because some uninformed dolt (not saying that's you) doesn't know any better. Facebook is providing it's servers through it's own revenue stream not Verizon's or Comcast who they then pay TO GIVE YOU ACCESS!!! You can call those that call out the scam that it is as ..."fear mongering". However saying, "don't pay attention to the man behind the curtain," is exactly how hundreds end up crying for rescue after boarding an unsinkable boat in the middle of the Atlantic.

 

[messerchmidt]

use some proxies or such built into mobil browsers to encrypt traffic and avoid this BS

 

[Commander FAT]

I wonder when they will start forcing a simple data plan even for phones that have even the most basic internet browsing capability.

Uh oh, I may have found another way to make them money.

I hope they don't read these forums.

Verizon already does this. Many phones requires a minimum $10/month data charge. I asked the girl at the VZ store why. She said it was because lots of people were inadvertently racking up data charges. My next question was "So I have to pay for their ignorance?". She said "yeah". At least she had a huge rack.

I hate Verizon, but I can't live without a cell phone.

 

[Hornet]

Its bad enough that the bandwidth limits are so low for wireless plan, and now this shit.

I

 

[mrpc9886]

On behalf of ATT (and Verizon, et al) shareholders everywhere, including myself, I want to thank all the junkies who can't seem to exist without having immediate gratification via wireless internet.

God bless you folks!

I'm also long XOM and CVX, ftw.

 

[GoldenTiger]

Those people who have Comcast and Comcast only would disagree with you. The Internet is becoming a commodity. Going for a job? Try submitting that resume via the post office with just a land line phone number as a from of contact vs. other applicants which submit via email or PDF and include many other ways to be reached. It wasn't too long ago that people who didn't take notice were saying things like "2GB per month (for phone) is more than enough for Internet access... who could possibly blow through that?" If you have an XBox, Steam, PS3, or Netflix account you know damn well how easy it is to blow through that amount of data. As more internet products come on line (can't wait till those cloud services come on line) and speeds get faster which will produce products that take more and more bandwidth do you really think that a year or two from now that the data cap will still be seen as reasonable? How long do you think MS will offer Office as a standalone installation?

Paying per service or per domain is why the push towards cloud services is so big, or getting to be.You'll pay once for "access" then more per service then again for preferential access to something that "access" is already giving you. Even if ALL of the above isn't an argument that you can accept there still is the problem of them asking for additional money for no reason at all. There's isn't a Facebook RAS solution that needs to be installed at an additional cost on the part of the service provider in order for you to reach Facebook. You can reach it NOW, TODAY, PRESENTLY with NO ADDITIONAL CHARGE AT ALL and net neutrality is what does or did that. They are attempting to extract additional money just because some uninformed dolt (not saying that's you) doesn't know any better. Facebook is providing it's servers through it's own revenue stream not Verizon's or Comcast who they then pay TO GIVE YOU ACCESS!!! You can call those that call out the scam that it is as ..."fear mongering". However saying, "don't pay attention to the man behind the curtain," is exactly how hundreds end up crying for rescue after boarding an unsinkable boat in the middle of the Atlantic.

Quoted for emphasis.

 

[Staples]

Let me guess, everyone in here pays for data on their carrier but still complains. If you are paying for it, then you support them. Apparently you do not hate them enough.

I for one do not pay for data because I do not think it is worth it. I can wait a whole few hours till I get home to check the net.

 

[RanceJustice]

The vast majority of communications companies build their networks with American taxpayer money, and then turn around and start figuring out better ways to screw us. Its time for us to make some real changes and force "common carrier" status again (ie. no telecom that has received even a cent of funding from any level of public funds is allowed to discriminate on the traffic in the network. You're just a pipe, and all data is private and inadmissible without judicial order) as well as regulate hardware expansion, so they can't keep taking out tax dollars and refusing to expand infrastructure (Verizon FIOS only going where it is immediately profitable) or trying to restrict users instead of build what we're paying you for (Comcast, with your data caps).

However, that's the stop-gap measure. I want to see them punished and a message sent to other greedy corporations. We The People have paid for the copper and fiber in the ground and the mobile towers through subsidy, they belong to We The People. Bang. Just like that. Just like in sane countries where the government owns and maintains open comm infrastructure. This is how South Korea, Japan, Sweden and other places with top-level broadband work, we need to get out from under the thumbs of big business.

 

[Commander FAT]

Let me guess, everyone in here pays for data on their carrier but still complains. If you are paying for it, then you support them. Apparently you do not hate them enough.

I for one do not pay for data because I do not think it is worth it. I can wait a whole few hours till I get home to check the net.

Same here.

 

[Azhar]

The article is pure speculation. All I see is that OpenNet, the developer of this subscription management software, invited Verizon, AT&T and Vodaphone to come listen to what they have to sell. This is perfectly normal. Chances are they'll politely tell OpenNet they'll consider it after the presentation, and OpenNet will never get a call back from them.

As IT manager I get a ton of emails from software developers asking me to come out and listen to their sales pitch.

Anyways, if the wireless companies do consider it, I can see them implementing this on phones which people chose NOT to buy data plans, so when they do use it, they'll get hit with a fee. Lord knows how many of my company's employees try to access data apps on their company-issued flip phones.

 

[MrGuvernment]

I don't think those websites would appreciate the drop in traffic this would result in.

but are they, or the users, willing to do anything about it... not likely,like most things people bitch all day about it on the net, but but dont do jack in the end.

 

[Outamyhead]

It looks like a European market idea, judging by the Euro currency, and Vodaphone.

 

[jqderrick]

Net Neutrality is a very important issue and we need to get actively involved making sure it stays around. I don't know exactly how to do that....donate to the EFF?