BMW 1 Series Coupe Forum / 1 Series Convertible Forum (1M / tii / 135i / 128i / Coupe / Cabrio / Hatchback) (BMW E82 E88 128i 130i 135i)
 





 

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      11-22-2017, 09:42 AM   #23
Uber Commuter
First Lieutenant
Uber Commuter's Avatar
211
Rep
312
Posts

Drives: 2014 328D xDrive
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Great news!

There was nothing neutral about it.


"...The traditional model of allocating bandwidth is to charge the customer for certain tiers of speed. But with certain websites like Netflix accounting for such a dominant portion of this consumption, the internet consumer who┬*does not┬*have a Netflix subscription is effectively subsidizing the consumption habits of the Netflix user. The idea of charging companies like Netflix a premium is a way to levy the cost of such high traffic websites on the people who actually use them, rather then spreading them across all users whether they consume these services or not... "
^That is 100% false, congratulations for buying into the corporate hype.

If you are providing a pipeline, all that matters is I've covered the cost for what size pipeline I want. If you cannot set your pricing correctly for your different pipelines, that's on you, not on some company at the other end of the pipe that I want to go to...

https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/26/th...ity-annotated/
Appreciate 1
      11-22-2017, 10:03 AM   #24
F32Fleet
BMWCCA since '03
F32Fleet's Avatar
United_States
472
Rep
6,530
Posts

Drives: 2015 435i
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southeastern US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uber Commuter View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Great news!

There was nothing neutral about it.


"...The traditional model of allocating bandwidth is to charge the customer for certain tiers of speed. But with certain websites like Netflix accounting for such a dominant portion of this consumption, the internet consumer whoÂ*does notÂ*have a Netflix subscription is effectively subsidizing the consumption habits of the Netflix user. The idea of charging companies like Netflix a premium is a way to levy the cost of such high traffic websites on the people who actually use them, rather then spreading them across all users whether they consume these services or not... "
^That is 100% false, congratulations for buying into the corporate hype.

If you are providing a pipeline, all that matters is I've covered the cost for what size pipeline I want. If you cannot set your pricing correctly for your different pipelines, that's on you, not on some company at the other end of the pipe that I want to go to...

https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/26/th...ity-annotated/
"If you are providing a pipeline, all that matters is I've covered the cost for what size pipeline I want. If you cannot set your pricing correctly for your different pipelines, that's on you, not on some company at the other end of the pipe that I want to go to..."

https://mises.org/blog/net-neutralit...tes-corruption

If I own the pipeline I can charge what I want to my customers. If I can't fulfill the needs of my customers they're free to go elsewhere or they can build their own pipeline. It's my property after all and I took all of the risk in building it.
__________________
"Drive more, worry less. "

435i, MPPK, MPE, M-Sport Line
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2017, 10:10 AM   #25
Uber Commuter
First Lieutenant
Uber Commuter's Avatar
211
Rep
312
Posts

Drives: 2014 328D xDrive
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
If you own the pipeline, you can charge what the market will bear to your customers. Unless, of course, the pipeline is essentially a public utility (which it is just like phones).

But you don't get to charge your customers, and then turn around and charge other companies for the same pipeline.

That's what you are advocating for...


And again; that opinion piece isn't fact, its opinion. Title II regulates monopolies, it puts no regulations or dampers on smaller companies trying to compete. That's just another corporate lie from the monopolies...
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2017, 10:16 AM   #26
DETRoadster
Captain
DETRoadster's Avatar
746
Rep
878
Posts

Drives: M2 MG 6MT / Moto Guzzi V7
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
If I own the pipeline I can charge what I want to my customers. If I can't fulfill the needs of my customers they're free to go elsewhere or they can build their own pipeline. It's my property after all and I took all of the risk in building it.
Really? Am I free to go elsewhere? Because here at my house I have the option of Comcast at $100/month for 10 Meg Internet (no phone, no TV, that's Internet only), or nothing. No other carrier services my neighborhood. So please explain to me my options.
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2017, 10:36 AM   #27
zx10guy
Major
967
Rep
1,372
Posts

Drives: 2013 135i
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: DC

iTrader: (0)

You both have valid arguments on this.

Here is how things work from someone in the networking profession as there is a clear misunderstanding of how capacity planning is done. Metrics are drawn on what the average users will demand from the network pipe. No business ever...ever...builds their network with the worst case situation in mind as a constant. This is just plain foolish. Networks are always designed with some oversubscription in mind. How much oversubscription is relative to how much the provider wants to spend in relation to the performance.

Here's another example of costs involved in large scale networking. A 100GbE QSFP28 LR4 optic which is probably used in multiples for connections between ISP data centers retails for around $20k. That's for one network path.

This argument has been tossed around with cellular Internet access. People started to hammer the bandwidth on 3G and 4G networks which resulted in monthly data caps or speed caps when you exceed a certain threshold. Things are turning around in that industry for the better with consumers as the market isn't locked down as it is with terrestrial Internet services. Now you see unlimited data plans coming back.

As I said above, two things need to happen. Open markets in all areas and as much as many on the right hate it, government subsidies/intervention with the backbone networks all ISPs connect in to. I would also throw in financial incentives for ISPs to enter markets they don't have a presence in now.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lups View Post
We might not be in an agreement on Trump, but I'll be the first penis chaser here to say I'll rather take it up in the ass than to argue with you on this.
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2017, 10:49 AM   #28
F32Fleet
BMWCCA since '03
F32Fleet's Avatar
United_States
472
Rep
6,530
Posts

Drives: 2015 435i
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southeastern US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DETRoadster View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
If I own the pipeline I can charge what I want to my customers. If I can't fulfill the needs of my customers they're free to go elsewhere or they can build their own pipeline. It's my property after all and I took all of the risk in building it.
Really? Am I free to go elsewhere? Because here at my house I have the option of Comcast at $100/month for 10 Meg Internet (no phone, no TV, that's Internet only), or nothing. No other carrier services my neighborhood. So please explain to me my options.
Net neutrality isn't necessarily about you, it's about companies that want sell services to you through the ISP and what the ISP should be able to charge them for doing so.

Now your lack of ISP providers is partly the result of govt granted monopoly (FYI.. just about every monopoly in the US was/is govt granted) and basic economics.

That's another issue in itself and I would say two-wrongs don't make a right.

I technically have 12 choices but there's the two biggies (Comcast or ATT Fiber) plus a future third (Google Fiber) and of course there are two satellite providers.

Think of the internet as a toll road. The road is full of both cars and trucks. Normally trucks (Netflix) pay a higher toll than cars (you) for use of the toll road because the trucks cause more wear and take up more space. If the toll company wants to open it's own trucking company to compete with others that's fine just as it's fine for other trucking companies to build their own toll road. Washington DC has no business making that determination.
__________________
"Drive more, worry less. "

435i, MPPK, MPE, M-Sport Line
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2017, 10:50 AM   #29
UncleWede
Long Time Admirer, First Time Owner
UncleWede's Avatar
United_States
3370
Rep
4,660
Posts

Drives: E90 325i Arctic
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oxnard, CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by zx10guy View Post
I would also throw in financial incentives for ISPs to enter markets they don't have a presence in now.
I don't have your infrastructure experience, but just last month I spent a day listening to politicos discuss how to "make" the providers move into underserved neighborhoods. Working in one of those, I was curious as to their ideas on how to make this happen. The best offer was to streamline the approval time/costs on those infrastructure projects within our jurisdiction.

Heck, it's been less than a year since I was able to upgrade from 2 bonded T-1s to fiber at city hall. And the permit for them to cut the street to put in that cable needed special "attention" to get it done at the speed the ISP wanted to work. . .
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2017, 10:53 AM   #30
TheAxiom
Major General
TheAxiom's Avatar
Japan
1756
Rep
7,665
Posts

Drives: E92 Msport 6 Speed
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Florida

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by danniexi View Post
I warned you all about it a year ago -

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1336783

__________________
E92 Msport 6MT: 1mm Valvetronic lift adjusters, AA headers, SS section 2, AFE SI stage 2 intake, BPC ALFA N tune, BMW PE
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2017, 10:56 AM   #31
zx10guy
Major
967
Rep
1,372
Posts

Drives: 2013 135i
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: DC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Net neutrality isn't necessarily about you, it's about companies that want sell services to you through the ISP and what the ISP should be able to charge them for doing so.

Now your lack of ISP providers is partly the result of govt granted monopoly (FYI.. just about every monopoly in the US was/is govt granted) and basic economics.

That's another issue in itself and I would say two-wrongs don't make a right.

I technically have 12 choices but there's the two biggies (Comcast or ATT Fiber) plus a future third (Google Fiber) and of course there are two satellite providers.

Think of the internet as a toll road. The road is full of both cars and trucks. Normally trucks (Netflix) pay a higher toll than cars (you) for use of the toll road because the trucks cause more wear and take up more space. If the toll company wants to open it's own trucking company to compete with others that's fine just as it's fine for other trucking companies to build their own toll road. Washington DC has no business making that determination.
The problem with your analogy is that it's not as cut and dry as paying more because you're driving a semi versus a car. The road operator isn't in the transport business so there's no conflict of interest. All the major ISPs have some service that competes with online only services like Netflix. That's where the problem is.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lups View Post
We might not be in an agreement on Trump, but I'll be the first penis chaser here to say I'll rather take it up in the ass than to argue with you on this.
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2017, 10:57 AM   #32
TheAxiom
Major General
TheAxiom's Avatar
Japan
1756
Rep
7,665
Posts

Drives: E92 Msport 6 Speed
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Florida

iTrader: (5)

The biggest issue is how data should be treated. NN rules require companies treat ALL data, regardless of source - the same.

I don't care if they decide to put a bandwidth limit - I don't believe they have the right to outright slowdown/censor data they don't like.
__________________
E92 Msport 6MT: 1mm Valvetronic lift adjusters, AA headers, SS section 2, AFE SI stage 2 intake, BPC ALFA N tune, BMW PE
Appreciate 2
      11-22-2017, 11:00 AM   #33
zx10guy
Major
967
Rep
1,372
Posts

Drives: 2013 135i
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: DC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by UncleWede View Post
I don't have your infrastructure experience, but just last month I spent a day listening to politicos discuss how to "make" the providers move into underserved neighborhoods. Working in one of those, I was curious as to their ideas on how to make this happen. The best offer was to streamline the approval time/costs on those infrastructure projects within our jurisdiction.

Heck, it's been less than a year since I was able to upgrade from 2 bonded T-1s to fiber at city hall. And the permit for them to cut the street to put in that cable needed special "attention" to get it done at the speed the ISP wanted to work. . .
Totally agree. The headaches around permitting is one mechanism local politicians create a difficult environment for new companies to enter a given market....dare I say oligopoly. It's actually embarrassing a country such as ours have companies just now boasting about Gigabit speeds when other countries have had Gigabit speeds to a large part of their population for years now.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lups View Post
We might not be in an agreement on Trump, but I'll be the first penis chaser here to say I'll rather take it up in the ass than to argue with you on this.
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2017, 11:13 AM   #34
DETRoadster
Captain
DETRoadster's Avatar
746
Rep
878
Posts

Drives: M2 MG 6MT / Moto Guzzi V7
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAxiom View Post
The biggest issue is how data should be treated. NN rules require companies treat ALL data, regardless of source - the same.

I don't care if they decide to put a bandwidth limit - I don't believe they have the right to outright slowdown/censor data they don't like.
Yes, that's the key. Agnostic data prioritization with tiered pricing for bandwidth or consumption.

Remember the days of paying for AOL by the minute? Remember saving your minutes on your call plan? Remember strict, low, data caps by all mobile carriers? The free market demanded that competition for consumers stamp out those limits. I have no doubt that bandwidth limits and data caps by ISPs, even if NN fails, will work themselves out. It's the content filtering that's the real evil here. The rest of it is just noise, IMO.

Last edited by DETRoadster; 11-22-2017 at 11:18 AM.
Appreciate 2
      11-22-2017, 11:14 AM   #35
DETRoadster
Captain
DETRoadster's Avatar
746
Rep
878
Posts

Drives: M2 MG 6MT / Moto Guzzi V7
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Net neutrality isn't necessarily about you, it's about companies that want sell services to you through the ISP and what the ISP should be able to charge them for doing so.

Now your lack of ISP providers is partly the result of govt granted monopoly (FYI.. just about every monopoly in the US was/is govt granted) and basic economics.

That's another issue in itself and I would say two-wrongs don't make a right.

I technically have 12 choices but there's the two biggies (Comcast or ATT Fiber) plus a future third (Google Fiber) and of course there are two satellite providers.

Think of the internet as a toll road. The road is full of both cars and trucks. Normally trucks (Netflix) pay a higher toll than cars (you) for use of the toll road because the trucks cause more wear and take up more space. If the toll company wants to open it's own trucking company to compete with others that's fine just as it's fine for other trucking companies to build their own toll road. Washington DC has no business making that determination.
As a consumer who is either helped or hurt by NN, I'd say it's absolutely about me.

I agree the lack of ISPs is a different subject. I was simply responding as you brought it up.
Appreciate 1
      11-22-2017, 11:59 AM   #36
C1Boston
Private First Class
99
Rep
198
Posts

Drives: 2012 328i Xdrive coupe
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Finland

iTrader: (0)

Awesome, this is going to be make me hate Comcast even more. Wish we had more ISPs...
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2017, 02:37 PM   #37
JohnnyCanuck
Captain
Canada
523
Rep
834
Posts

Drives: 2016 M235i xDrive
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Vancouver

iTrader: (0)

Just to be clear on what this means for the consumer: if you're a Comcast customer, you can enjoy blazing speeds for InstantTV, but expect Netflix and Amazon Prime to be choked to speeds that may not even support 4K unless Netflix or Amazon are prepared to buy the bandwidth from Comcast. And who will pay for that bandwidth? The consumer because Netflix and ultimately Amazon will pass on the cost. Or, maybe Comcast actually refuses to sell Netflix or Amazon the bandwidth and uses it to leverage customer preference of InstantTV. Or, they decide to only offer the bandwidth to you as a customer if you buy InstantTV or at a substantial premium.

All the big ISP's have content and streaming plays and if they are allowed to differentiate the traffic without being regulated you can expect them to leverage their offerings to serve their own subsidiary services. This isn't like normal consumer goods where you can buy a shirt from Norsdstrom's and different one from Brooks ... it's not like we're going to see internet service piecemealed in a fashion where you can buy HBO Now over your Cox connection and Netflix through your Verizon one.

This is highly anti-consumer and serves only the interests of a handful of content owning ISP's who may very well collude anyway.

Fortunately, in Canada, the CRTC is strongly in the net neutrality camp, but if I were an American I'd be incredibly motivated to make my elected representatives completely accountable and make my vote and voice heard on the issue.
Appreciate 1
      11-22-2017, 04:36 PM   #38
DETRoadster
Captain
DETRoadster's Avatar
746
Rep
878
Posts

Drives: M2 MG 6MT / Moto Guzzi V7
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyCanuck View Post
Just to be clear on what this means for the consumer: if you're a Comcast customer, you can enjoy blazing speeds for InstantTV, but expect Netflix and Amazon Prime to be choked to speeds that may not even support 4K unless Netflix or Amazon are prepared to buy the bandwidth from Comcast. And who will pay for that bandwidth? The consumer because Netflix and ultimately Amazon will pass on the cost.
Actually, Netflix reached a deal with Comcast and paid the ransom. Speeds are fine. DirecTV, HBO, and Amazon I dont think have paid and thus are throttled. They constantly buffer at freeze at my house while Netflix is smooth as silk.

Oh, and Netflix just raised their prices. Hmmm, coincidence?
Appreciate 1
      11-22-2017, 05:30 PM   #39
aozer
Second Lieutenant
aozer's Avatar
212
Rep
299
Posts

Drives: M235i
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Texas

iTrader: (0)

funny how none of the typical subforum posters have made an appearance in here. i guess if a thread doesnt give them the opportunity to cry about the 'retarded libs' they just arent interested.
Appreciate 1
      11-22-2017, 06:38 PM   #40
Mr Carrots
First Lieutenant
130
Rep
375
Posts

Drives: 2017 M240ix - VR DP & JB4
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Texas

iTrader: (0)

I was on the fence about this but if Open Society, the Ford Foundation and Reddit all demand NN stays then I'm changing my vote to Hillary Clinton.

Going back to the bad old days of 2015 would be literally exactly just like every not-at-all ridiculous example of packaged internet that gets posted 10000 x a day on Reddit. It will be like using AOL circa 95 just much worse.

Don't say you weren't warned, Drumpfkins.
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2017, 06:45 PM   #41
Real Dodger
I work in Colleyville, and I do own a Collie
Real Dodger's Avatar
United_States
237
Rep
353
Posts

Drives: 2012 BMW 135i
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Colleyville TX

iTrader: (0)

In the history of bad ideas, this may rank in the top 10.
Fill that swamp back up!
__________________
"He came back from the dead. And wished he hadn't!"
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2017, 10:10 PM   #42
F32Fleet
BMWCCA since '03
F32Fleet's Avatar
United_States
472
Rep
6,530
Posts

Drives: 2015 435i
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southeastern US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by zx10guy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Net neutrality isn't necessarily about you, it's about companies that want sell services to you through the ISP and what the ISP should be able to charge them for doing so.

Now your lack of ISP providers is partly the result of govt granted monopoly (FYI.. just about every monopoly in the US was/is govt granted) and basic economics.

That's another issue in itself and I would say two-wrongs don't make a right.

I technically have 12 choices but there's the two biggies (Comcast or ATT Fiber) plus a future third (Google Fiber) and of course there are two satellite providers.

Think of the internet as a toll road. The road is full of both cars and trucks. Normally trucks (Netflix) pay a higher toll than cars (you) for use of the toll road because the trucks cause more wear and take up more space. If the toll company wants to open it's own trucking company to compete with others that's fine just as it's fine for other trucking companies to build their own toll road. Washington DC has no business making that determination.
The problem with your analogy is that it's not as cut and dry as paying more because you're driving a semi versus a car. The road operator isn't in the transport business so there's no conflict of interest. All the major ISPs have some service that competes with online only services like Netflix. That's where the problem is.
So what is there's competition. You don't "need" Netflix. They offer a commodity, just as you don't need Comcast TV programming.

I just don't understand why Netflix subscribers think they need non-netflix subscribers to pay a "Netflix" subsidy.
__________________
"Drive more, worry less. "

435i, MPPK, MPE, M-Sport Line
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2017, 10:14 PM   #43
F32Fleet
BMWCCA since '03
F32Fleet's Avatar
United_States
472
Rep
6,530
Posts

Drives: 2015 435i
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southeastern US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyCanuck View Post
Just to be clear on what this means for the consumer: if you're a Comcast customer, you can enjoy blazing speeds for InstantTV, but expect Netflix and Amazon Prime to be choked to speeds that may not even support 4K unless Netflix or Amazon are prepared to buy the bandwidth from Comcast. And who will pay for that bandwidth? The consumer because Netflix and ultimately Amazon will pass on the cost. Or, maybe Comcast actually refuses to sell Netflix or Amazon the bandwidth and uses it to leverage customer preference of InstantTV. Or, they decide to only offer the bandwidth to you as a customer if you buy InstantTV or at a substantial premium.

All the big ISP's have content and streaming plays and if they are allowed to differentiate the traffic without being regulated you can expect them to leverage their offerings to serve their own subsidiary services. This isn't like normal consumer goods where you can buy a shirt from Norsdstrom's and different one from Brooks ... it's not like we're going to see internet service piecemealed in a fashion where you can buy HBO Now over your Cox connection and Netflix through your Verizon one.

This is highly anti-consumer and serves only the interests of a handful of content owning ISP's who may very well collude anyway.

Fortunately, in Canada, the CRTC is strongly in the net neutrality camp, but if I were an American I'd be incredibly motivated to make my elected representatives completely accountable and make my vote and voice heard on the issue.
So what. If the government allowed itself to open the market then Netflix might, just might be able to offer their product by going around Comcast.
__________________
"Drive more, worry less. "

435i, MPPK, MPE, M-Sport Line
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2017, 10:20 PM   #44
zx10guy
Major
967
Rep
1,372
Posts

Drives: 2013 135i
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: DC

iTrader: (0)

Just like you really don't need Internet either.

To be clear I'm not a Netflix subscriber. I loath streaming media. i paid a lot of money for the system at home to deal with compressed lossy video/audio regardless of how many dots the streaming video is capable of.

I've stated my case from both sides. As a networking professional, I understand the costs with increasing infrastructure capacity more than most here. As a consumer, I can see how removing net neutrality will create an anti competitive space making the oligopoly system we have in place even worse.

I've stated what I felt are the only real fixes for this problem in my previous posts.
Appreciate 1
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:19 AM.




1addicts
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST