Slashdot Mirror


Comcast Predicts Usage Cap Within 5 Years

finalcutmonstar (1862890) writes "With net neutrality dying a slow painful death, it is no surprise that in an investor call yesterday Comcast executive VP(and Darth Vader impersonator) David Cohen predicts bandwidth caps within the next 5 years. The cap would start at 300 GB and cost the customer subscriber an extra 10 USD for 50 GB. But, Cohen stated that 'I would also predict that the vast majority of our customers would never be caught in the buying the additional buckets of usage, that we will always want to say the basic level of usage at a sufficiently high level that the vast majority of our customers are not implicated by the usage-based billing plan.'" Update: 05/15 13:58 GMT by T : Correction: Cohen is actually talking about data transferred, rather than stored (as headline originally had it), as reader MAXOMENOS points out.

19 of 475 comments (clear)

  1. Coded language? by Moof123 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nice network you have there, it would be a shame if something happened to it...

    1. Re:Coded language? by jythie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      More like 'You only want our ISP service and not cable TV? Well, not only are we going to charge the company that you do get your videos from, but we are going to charge you extra for delivering them. Oh hey, notice how much cheaper OUR video service is, are you sure you don't want it instead?'

    2. Re:Coded language? by w3woody · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A free market presumes competition, and it presumes regulation against perverse incentives. Neither are the case here, where cable companies are granted de-facto monopolies over geographic regions, and where the majority of traffic being carried on the internet is increasingly in direct competition with the cable company's video offerings.

      It's why, while I do have sympathy for a properly functioning free market (with competition and no perverse incentives), I have no sympathy for cable companies trying to argue that it's their hardware, they should be able to do what they want. Yes, it's their hardware--but they've been granted regional monopolies. That strongly implies that they have no leg to stand on when they argue 'free markets' to bypass regulations being imposed on their networks.

    3. Re:Coded language? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Interesting

      My solution is, and will continue to be, last mile is owned by Municipality. Bring it into a centralize COLO facility, and provide access (by auction) to the top 5 bidders., each given exactly the same space. This way, a residential unit (household) can go to the five, request prices / services and pick the one they like the best. The COLO configures the switch and the residential unit is serviced with exactly what they want, at a price they can shop against.

      The problem isn't last mile, that problem has been solved. The problem is servicing the last mile in a way that allows for competition. COLO is the only way to provide open and free marketplace to the customers AND providers.

      But this requires a shift from leased right of ways to Municipal Managed last mile.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  2. Editorial by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Headline: "Comcast predicts storage cap"

    Story in a nutshell: Comcast exec predicts bandwidth cap.

    WTF?

    1. Re:Editorial by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Bandwidth, in networking, is a measure of the amount of data transfered per time unit. The Comcast exec is predicting a transfer cap, i.e. a maximum quantity of data.

      You're right, though; Neither are "storage". Whoever titled the post is a moron.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    2. Re:Editorial by sycodon · · Score: 5, Interesting

      1. Void all local agreements giving exclusive access to a community to one internet provider.
      2. Mandate that they are able to accommodate ALL the bandwidth they sell at any time.
      3. Separate the businesses into a content side and a Access Provider side. Content side pays the same as all other content providers. Access Provider charges the same to all Content Providers.
      4. NO limits on what you can do with your bandwidth.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    3. Re:Editorial by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 5, Informative

      Bandwidth, in networking, is a measure of the amount of data transfered per time unit. The Comcast exec is predicting a transfer cap, i.e. a maximum quantity of data.

      No, the Comcast exec is predicting a bandwidth cap.

      Or do you seriously believe that his 300 GB cap is a LIFETIME cap? Much more likely it's a monthly cap.

      And 300GB/month is a measure of a quantity of data (300GB) per time unit (month).

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    4. Re:Editorial by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 5, Funny

      The internet, that you when you click on the blue "e", that's your cloud. You can only store so much on your cloud. Every time you browse, you store more and more in the your cloud. If you store to much water in the cloud, the tubes of the internet will leak.

      That's why we need to cap the amount of water you store in there. Especially Netflix. They steal water from your cloud, and pump too much storage in. So we had to build a dam, to store water and generate Net Neutrality. That's how the Market moves.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    5. Re:Editorial by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      2. Mandate that they are able to accommodate ALL the bandwidth they sell at any time.

      We already have this. Go look up leasing a T3 connection for your home; Guaranteed 44Mb line. Expect to pay several thousand dollars per month.

      Your home broadband connection is oversold, and that's fine. That's why it's cheap, and it is very cheap. The problem is that they didn't tell you that that was how it was, and instead sold you on "up to $Mb download speed". Now that there are services that will actually saturate your 20Mb line 24/7 (bittorrent, netflix, whatever) the connections are congested. It's like putting all of the cars on the motorway at once; Nobody will get anywhere.

      If the model was shifted to paying for the data you use regardless of your line speed, at least it would be fair; You get what you pay for, no more, no less. I watch netflix, I download ISOs and games on Steam, and I rarely hit north of 150GB in a month. This scheme seems fine to me. Then again, I'm looking at this through the rose-tinted glasses of a consumer, not a greedy corporate sociopath. I'm sure they'll have us bent over again soon enough.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  3. Prediction or prescription? by noblebeast · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I suspect this has less to do with prediction, and more to do with prescription. As in, they want to set up the expectations that will guide the perceptions of the public and of policymakers in regards to what is a "reasonable" amount of bandwidth to be consuming, in order to justify their ridiculous overage charges.

    --
    Its not so bad as long as you can keep the fear from your mind.
  4. Awesome! by Mitreya · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The cap would start at 300 GB and cost the customer subscriber an extra 10 USD for 50 GB.

    And I bet that the cap would proceed to move down to 250 GB and so on. USA is the only country where internet access quality is actually moving in reverse.

  5. Only pirates & terrorists need more than 300 G by Simulant · · Score: 5, Funny


    How long until we hear that?

  6. Caps Are Definitely Coming by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Caps will definitely come. Not because they are "needed to help manage network congestion" or some other reason that the ISPs will trot out. They'll come for four simple reasons.

    1) Video over the Internet threatens their own video services. Caps help make Internet video more expensive (via overage fees) and will help drive people away from Internet video.

    2) Even if people use Internet video, the ISPs will get more money and they can never resist the smell of money.

    3) The ISPs have monopolies (or near monopolies) in their service areas so they can do whatever they want and the public needs to take it.

    4) They are big and powerful enough that they will make sure they have enough politicians "donated to" to prevent any government action against them.

    Of course, they will keep on trotting out the "small group of users is slowing everyone's speeds down and caps will make them pay their fair share" line to justify the caps. The real cause of any slowdown will be because they take their profits and don't reinvest them into upgrading their networks. After all, why upgrade? It's not like there are any competitors to beat in the market or any government officials with backbone to pressure them into speeding up connections.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    1. Re:Caps Are Definitely Coming by Eristone · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The vast majority of ISPs in this country do not have the vast majority of customers. The vast majority of end users (you know - ma and pa Facebook user) are on Comcast, Verizon, AT&T or Time Warner (soon to be Comcast). Comcast and Time Warner are content providers as well as bandwidth providers. Verizon and AT&T are the old phone company monopolies (AT&T and GTE). With that oligarchy of companies, policies and pricing set will drive the market. As far as the majority of money going to fees - the last year each of the companies mentioned didn't exactly have losses or even just make a couple bucks. Record profits - not quite.. but definitely in the range so the race to the bottom is still putting the gold plate on the swimming pools. As far as streaming - how many of those Facebook posts have videos attached to them? 25 cute cat doing something adorable videos a day will start to knock on those bandwidth caps fairly quickly. And lately those videos don't require you to click on them to start - they run quietly in the background and you don't notice them until you turn up the sound.

      Don't mix up business users with consumers - different animals with different use patterns. And for a history - look at cell phone - and land line usage. (wondering if you're old enough to remember when calling cross-country was a once a month thing to talk to grandma instead of doing so on a whim)

  7. another prediction by nimbius · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I predict in 5 years ill have a laundry list of null routes for various advertising providers and comcast hardware. I'll torrent every show and every song because to listen to them again on pandora will put me over my 'cap.' I'll have constructed a cantenna out of an array of garbage cans strapped to the roof of my house and have an army of ASIC hardware working round the clock to crack every WPA and WEP AP i see.

    Oh, and I'll switch to dryline DSL and robocall every politician in my state asking for municipal high speed fiber. I and everyone youve ever infuriated with deep packet traffic shaping 'its comcastic' advertising blitzkreig will petition our government to bury you as we boycott your shit-tier service.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  8. Re:Only pirates & terrorists need more than 30 by jythie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When I canceled my Comcast subscription due to the cap, the person handling the call explicitly told me there was no legitimate reason for that kind of usage so I must be a pirate. When I tried to politely explain that my Netflix usage exceeded that, I was again told there was not legitimate reason for the kind of usage.

  9. Re: I predict the future.... by radiumsoup · · Score: 5, Informative

    Have you seen what has happened because of the Google Fiber rollout? Here in Austin, you have AT&T scrambling to match the offer after the mere ANNOUNCEMENT by Google that they intended to offer service, and now there's a local ISP called Grande doing the same (although they already had a few fiber rings around the city to service their business customers, so their entry into the fight was a simple choice). That's right, with nothing other than a statement of intent, we have a virtual land race for uncapped near-gigabit internet for under $80 a month. If that's not competitive economics at work, I don't know what is.

  10. Re:Make up your mind! by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 5, Informative

    You're right, so long as you don't actually use your connection, caps aren't a problem.

    Of course, if you don't do any of that, then a basic ADSL connection would be just fine and 10 years ago is calling.

    -------------

    We cut DirecTV off 4 months ago, we are a 100% streaming home now.

    We have 5, the kids often watch something on the iPad, mom and dad are on the TV, etc. between Netflix, Amazon Prime videos, Vudu, we use a lot of bandwidth, and that will only go up once 4k streaming comes out.

    Then the PS3 is downloading patches and updates in the background, as is the multiple Windows computers, and every month or so the iPads update as well.

    Heck, our new Sony 3D TV has had three software updates itself in 6 months.

    Then there is backups, I use two backup programs, Crashplan and Backblaze, to backup our family videos, pictures, and documents, it is about 6TB worth of data (2x of course)

    Then there is steam, I have many, many games on Steam, and they have lots and lots of patches that auto update.

    Then there is online play, SWTOR probably doesn't use tons and tons of bandwidth, but running for a few hours probably uses a decent amount, and they have patches to download every two weeks or so.

    We easily use multiple terabytes of data in a month, and not a single byte of it is pirated. We are also not that unusual, many families are cutting the cord, our friends have dropped cable or sat TV and went to all streaming. They have XBoxes and PS3s, and computers that update, etc...

    300gb is either a lot, or not nearly enough, depending on your situation.