Rantings and tirades of a frustrated economist.
This ''net neutrality'' issue is how internet service is priced, for the past 20~ years (you could argue that '95 was when internet use 'went mainstream') it's been on the ''all you can eat buffet'' model. One monthly rate regardless of usage, which worked fine for normal use, such as email, general web surfing or up/downloading files. What has changed, is streaming video services such as Netflix, Amazon streaming, ect. The internet was never designed or intended for video on demand - but that's what it's increasingly being used for. The problem with that is video requires both large amounts of 'bandwidth' (the size of the internet pipe, as in how many bits can flow through it) and latency (how smoothly those bits can flow through it, to avoid stutter, jitter, pauses for buffering like the YouTube 'spinner' or degraded video quality such as pixellation). The more video you pull through that 'pipe' the worse the problem is. For example if your a fat load who whines ''I want my 4K Netflix!'' not understanding or caring how much hi-def ''4K Netflix'' has to pull through the 'pipe' (hint: a DVD is 4.5 GB, a Blu-ray is 40 GB - that's how much extra data is needed for hi-def video).If Netflix and others had to charge extra for the extra load they put on the system they couldn't get away with charging $10 a month, probably more like $100/mo. But with ''net neutrality'' ISP's can't charge extra for extra use (like electric and water companies can) so how do they make up for it? Charge everybody more, whether they use Netflix, ect. or not or ''throttle'' heavy use in peak demand times.This guy ran an ISP, knows how it all works and can explain it. Worth reading.
Post a Comment