Time Warner trial - charging based on bandwidth usage Options

[Spectatrix]

Time Warner sucks (so does Beaumont). I'll stick with my Grande Communications service. "8 Mbps" (really 12+, based on the speed tests I've taken) for $40/mo. Booya.

Now, one cable company is starting to push back at excessive bandwidth usage caused mainly by video downloading. After an internal memo was leaked, Time Warner Cable confirmed it's planning a trial in Beaumont, Tex., in which it will charge Internet subscribers based on usage.

http://blogs.moneycentral.msn.com/topstock...ernet-fees.aspx

This post has been edited by Spectatrix: Jan 18 2008, 04:08 PM

[kcroxyoursox]

So it's allocation for Internet? I'm down for that. Those who use more should pay more, just like electricity, water, and other public works.

But I think there should be a price cap or things could get sour quickly.

[pysex]

So it's allocation for Internet? I'm down for that. Those who use more should pay more, just like electricity, water, and other public works.

But I think there should be a price cap or things could get sour quickly.

no


allocation for internet is bad....

why? because it will lead to allocation for how much television you watch...

the internet isn't a limited resource...so why are we charging for usage....

if you don't use the internet that often and don't want to pay the 44+ dollars it takes for broadband then don't pipe that much crap to your computer....get netzero

and to say that someone who downloads a video is causing others to suffer is total fucking moronic profiteering bullshit