With this new concept, they're treating the current level of file-sharers as a static resource (or a constant) in their equations. But everyone will have left the network.
They expect people to keep sharing, and the more you share, the closer you can get your monthly payments TO THEM "down to zero".
But if all the file-sharers have left, this will just become a distributed content management system...so how about we START at zero, and YOU pay ME for my bandwidth & network resources??
this concept = fail.
If ISPs started to meter total usage, then Ad-blockers, Flash-blockers, and anti-ad Host files would become standard installations in every user's browser.
-Users would think twice before clicking on those "marginally interesting news links". -They would stop using YouTube to watch those bandwidth-hogging "cat on the ceiling fan" videos. -They would stop editing files remotely on Google docs and start to edit files locally again (in word?). -They would stop clicking on Google ads since it would be an unnecessary waste of costly bandwidth. -Google, and all advertisers, would be "fenced off" from the "internet eyeballs" and would start to die off as ad revenues plummeted. (You can't click on an ad you don't see.) -Millions of news & information websites (that depend on advertising) would also start to suffocate - the smaller ones closing shop first. -Also, the quality of authored pages would take a severe hit as web site owners cut back on those 'costly' writers (similar to what's happening to newspapers now). -The whole ecosystem would start to suffer greatly as people held back on internet usage in general (similar to the recession now as people hold back on spending, or driving less due to the high price of gas).
It would be a downward spiral that would be extremely hard to pull out of. Even if ISPs saw the error of their ways and restored flat-rate pricing, users by then would be so used to all their great ad/flash/host blockers that they would have no (individual) incentive to remove them from their browsers. Think about it, if you had the ability to remove commercials from tv, would you ever turn commercials back on again? The record industry has already crossed the line of pushing up p2p usage to the point where those users will never return as customers.
The whole net currently depends on people seeing ads. Most people today have no incentive to install ad blockers since their 'flat' internet-fee covers all the additional bandwidth. The free flow of information and the quality of the net we enjoy today is fueled by this advertising; which, in turn is fueled by users' ability to freely travel the net without an odometer counting each byte transferred.
Metered usage would be the end of the net as we know it today.
I did this with an office of 50 computers. We bought 50 XP Licenses, left them unopened in a locked cabinet, then proceeded to install 50 corporate (hacked) versions that didn't have all the activation nightmares/calling microsoft crap everytime you change a piece of hardware. Microsoft relaxed the hardware changes over the years (prob because of people like me), but I see no reason to change now and will always do this.
We paid for the licenses, we use their product, we just took the protection crap out of the equation.
Slashdot Mirror
With this new concept, they're treating the current level of file-sharers as a static resource (or a constant) in their equations. But everyone will have left the network. They expect people to keep sharing, and the more you share, the closer you can get your monthly payments TO THEM "down to zero". But if all the file-sharers have left, this will just become a distributed content management system...so how about we START at zero, and YOU pay ME for my bandwidth & network resources?? this concept = fail.
1. Go to google.com using any browser
2. type: blah blah -expertsexchange.com
Done.
Please no one tell me I forgot 3. Profit ...or i guess, 4. Enjoy the sex change.
Forget the soup!
Can they read the chip on my shoulder?
If ISPs started to meter total usage, then Ad-blockers, Flash-blockers, and anti-ad Host files would become standard installations in every user's browser.
-Users would think twice before clicking on those "marginally interesting news links".
-They would stop using YouTube to watch those bandwidth-hogging "cat on the ceiling fan" videos.
-They would stop editing files remotely on Google docs and start to edit files locally again (in word?).
-They would stop clicking on Google ads since it would be an unnecessary waste of costly bandwidth.
-Google, and all advertisers, would be "fenced off" from the "internet eyeballs" and would start to die off as ad revenues plummeted. (You can't click on an ad you don't see.)
-Millions of news & information websites (that depend on advertising) would also start to suffocate - the smaller ones closing shop first.
-Also, the quality of authored pages would take a severe hit as web site owners cut back on those 'costly' writers (similar to what's happening to newspapers now).
-The whole ecosystem would start to suffer greatly as people held back on internet usage in general (similar to the recession now as people hold back on spending, or driving less due to the high price of gas).
It would be a downward spiral that would be extremely hard to pull out of. Even if ISPs saw the error of their ways and restored flat-rate pricing, users by then would be so used to all their great ad/flash/host blockers that they would have no (individual) incentive to remove them from their browsers. Think about it, if you had the ability to remove commercials from tv, would you ever turn commercials back on again? The record industry has already crossed the line of pushing up p2p usage to the point where those users will never return as customers.
The whole net currently depends on people seeing ads. Most people today have no incentive to install ad blockers since their 'flat' internet-fee covers all the additional bandwidth. The free flow of information and the quality of the net we enjoy today is fueled by this advertising; which, in turn is fueled by users' ability to freely travel the net without an odometer counting each byte transferred.
Metered usage would be the end of the net as we know it today.
I did this with an office of 50 computers. We bought 50 XP Licenses, left them unopened in a locked cabinet, then proceeded to install 50 corporate (hacked) versions that didn't have all the activation nightmares/calling microsoft crap everytime you change a piece of hardware. Microsoft relaxed the hardware changes over the years (prob because of people like me), but I see no reason to change now and will always do this.
We paid for the licenses, we use their product, we just took the protection crap out of the equation.