Slashdot Mirror
Australian ISPs Claim Net Neutrality Is an 'American Problem'
RATLSNAKE writes "The heads of some of the most popular Australian ISPs were all interviewed over at ZDNet about Net Neutrality. For once, they all seem to agree, and they say it's a problem with the US business model, or the lack thereof. They discuss why they don't think it's an issue in Australia. Simon Hackett, the managing director of Adelaide-based ISP Internode, had this to say: 'The [Net neutrality] problem isn't about running out of capacity. It's a business model that's about to explode due to stress. ... The idea that the entire population can subsidize a minority with an extremely high download quantity actually isn't necessarily the only way to live.' Of course, this also explains why we Australians do not have truly unlimited plans."
Never listen to Australians/New Zealanders when they start babbling about the internet and ISP policies. Their argument always boils down to this: We have crappy expensive internet service so therefore the rest of the world should too.
If they had their druthers everyone would be on dial-up with a download cap of 1 gig a month.
Net Neutrality: Geeks, gamers and techopundits demanding that they pay the same as everyone else for ten times the bandwidth and three times the quality. They are demanding to pay the same $19.95 as their grandma who only checks her email once a day.
The "One Price Fits All" model that we have necessitates a Lowest Common Denominator product. We should be sending market demands to networks that we want differentiation, but instead we're sending political demands to Congress to forbid differentiation.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
I love when the mythical middle class gets brought up. Strange how its always defined in such a way that it includes the largest voting block. I guess we have reached the stage of bread & circuses. The Visigoths will be coming soon.
The Canadian middle class spends a reasonable amount of money for a health care system that covers everybody. The American middle class spends a huge amount of money for a system that doesn't even cover the entire middle class. Who's better off? If you think it's us, you've never had an expensive medical problem, or tried to find insurance for a high-risk family member.
Anyway, both systems subsidize minorities. Canada's is poor people who pay less taxes. Ours is highly-profitable health-care providers and insurers. And our subsidies are a lot higher than theirs.
Hot flash, dude: Canada didn't invent the shared-risk model of health care. They just made membership in the risk pool mandatory. That not only guarantees everybody access, it makes for a more efficient, affordable system.