There is a conflict of interest - TWC has a real issue with low vs high capacity users, and fairness to users is the other side. They also have plant considerations planning for DOCSIS 3.0 and the associated equipment.
First, the proposed plan is egregious in setting arbitrary caps. There should be a universal cap (rate differentials remain based on speed bandwidth, not consumption) based on the highest 2-5% of all users. Say the cap would be 90% of the highest 2% of users. If the highest 2% consumed 100 GB on the average over a 3 month period, the cap would be 90 GB with a standard $0.50 per GB above. The cap should be reset every 3 months to allow for new high use services to develop. The cap should be raised arbitrarily by 20% every 6 months regardless of heaviest users.
Secondly , Congress of the FCC should ensure that this is not simply a way around proposed network neutrality rules. TWC could (and probably would) exempt their preferred services from the bandwidth cap creating a tremendous preference, especially for streaming music, video and images. A new form of the old walled garden.
And finally, the cap set must allow for video streaming video to traverse the TWC network in greater and greater volume. To use its monopolistic broadband position in most of its markets to restrict user chosen video is about as truly non-competitive as anything Microsoft ever pulled.
A cap is a bad idea (like charging for local voice calls by the minute) that completely changes the Internet from a world wide network open to all users and uses to a private TWC owned system.
Slashdot Mirror
There is a conflict of interest - TWC has a real issue with low vs high capacity users, and fairness to users is the other side. They also have plant considerations planning for DOCSIS 3.0 and the associated equipment. First, the proposed plan is egregious in setting arbitrary caps. There should be a universal cap (rate differentials remain based on speed bandwidth, not consumption) based on the highest 2-5% of all users. Say the cap would be 90% of the highest 2% of users. If the highest 2% consumed 100 GB on the average over a 3 month period, the cap would be 90 GB with a standard $0.50 per GB above. The cap should be reset every 3 months to allow for new high use services to develop. The cap should be raised arbitrarily by 20% every 6 months regardless of heaviest users. Secondly , Congress of the FCC should ensure that this is not simply a way around proposed network neutrality rules. TWC could (and probably would) exempt their preferred services from the bandwidth cap creating a tremendous preference, especially for streaming music, video and images. A new form of the old walled garden. And finally, the cap set must allow for video streaming video to traverse the TWC network in greater and greater volume. To use its monopolistic broadband position in most of its markets to restrict user chosen video is about as truly non-competitive as anything Microsoft ever pulled. A cap is a bad idea (like charging for local voice calls by the minute) that completely changes the Internet from a world wide network open to all users and uses to a private TWC owned system.