Re: corporations

[Doug]

Dan Minette wrote:

----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2002 11:20 PM
Subject: Re: corporations

Erik Reuter wrote:

On


This is a GOOD thing. Bandwidth costs money to provide, and is a limited
resource. It makes perfect sense to charge based on how much bandwidth
is used, that is how a free market works. If you try to suppress the
law of supply and demand, you get shortages and outages, much like what
happened with power in California.

This essay is misguided, and the comparison to the airwaves is false
(cables and routers cost money to install and maintain, unlike
"airwaves" which could be used in peer-to-peer fashion without any
expense by a 3rd party).

What about cable TV?  They don't charge by how much of a couch potato
you are.

I'm not trying to be a wise guy, just wondering what the difference is.

Doug

The easy answer is that the signal is broadcast to your house whether you
are watching or not.  A lot of traffic goes on a broadband connection, but
only when used. For a while, they use to charge for more than 1 TV, but the
real reason for that was enhanced revenue, not the need to put in better
connections for the folks with 5 TVs.  Indeed, my broadband internet is
spliced in with the same cable as my cable TVs now.

Yea, after I sent my last that occurred to me. I imagine that my use - surfing the net and low volume email - would be under the radar anyway.
How would they measure use?

Doug



Doug


_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l