You can view the page at http://filesharingtalk.com/content/1...-Credit-System
You can view the page at http://filesharingtalk.com/content/1...-Credit-System
I am beginning to TRULY fucking HATE corporate mentality.
Never cared for or played with AT&T but I do have to say that it's kind of maybe sort of a new idea :whistling Someday things will fall in the right way.
Only a true mega corp would think of such a thing to increase revenue and drive share prices up without helping the one person who pays their wage "THE CONSUMER"
So, if you subscribe to LoveFiLM or NetFlix, you could find yourself paying extra on top of the monthly subscription. I mean, why not just charge us for the fucking air we breath.
What next? A pregnancy tax, which is chargeable every time you give birth (don't worry OlegL, it is only women who carry babies). And if you cannot afford to pay? Termination?
So, they want to introduce different tariffs depending on the traffic, even though all data is delivered the same, regardless whether it is email, a web page or a downloaded file (or stream). Net neutrality is on its way out for good, by the sound of it.
My brain can't understand the logic, if they don't want me to use the 100gb (or whatever) I pay for then why sell me it?
Bandwidth is no longer in any form of short supply. In fact, our service prices should be coming down. However, there is little competition when it comes to broadband in most areas. Metered service in Canadia was done to keep people from abandoning local media in favor of Netflix.
This idea serves corporate interests- protection for The Industries, and finding a way to justify metered services. While normal humans want to use the free (in all senses of the word) internet, corporations see it as nothing but a means for carving it into consumables. ($$$) And LOLCats. Corporate types love LOLCats. :no:
TheFoX, here's a good article on the recent unsuccessful attempt to impose net neutrality on ISPs: http://www.theverge.com/2014/1/15/53...f-the-internet
The entire case revolved around the fact that broadband providers are currently not considered "common carriers". Even Judge Tatel, the one that passed the ruling against net neutrality, admits that "broadband providers represent a threat to internet openness and could act in ways that would ultimately inhibit the speed and extent of future broadband deployment."
The only problem, is again, that ISPs aren't common carriers. Tatel can't do squat until they are classified as such by the FCC. Unfortunately for us, Comcast (NBC), TWC, and the like have way too much sway in the government :rolleyes:. Money speaks.
It's price fixing plain and simple. All the ISPs have agreements to fix prices and not compete in certain areas. It's in their best financial interest, even if it is detrimental to the consumer and the growth of the nation, so they do it. Christ, they have a 97% profit margin! Of course those greedy assholes would want to do whatever they can to continue to financially rape the entire Internet consuming nation. Hell, they are even lobbying to stop Google Fiber because they don't want to compete.
The REAL kicker, bobb, is that it was not Comcast, Time Warners, etc. who "invested" in the infrastructure- it was the taxpayer. We are paying PREMIUM $$$$ for a service that we already own. Nice scam. :angry:
It looks like VPN subscriber numbers are about to go up.
Also, if you are paying for a 30Mbps internet connection why does ATT get all fussy if you sit right at 30Mbps all night? (like you ever actually get what you pay for with internet speeds) If they didn't want you to use it they shouldn't have sold it, right?