I’ma regular visitor and poster on p2pnet and its users/readers have taught me something new in the last few days:
Users are unaware of the impact their online activities have on the networks.
For three days I ranted, raved (and generally got extremely frustrated) they couldn’t understand the concept a one gallon jar is designed to hold only a gallon of water. Pressurising the jar at 3 Bar will allow a reasonable flow of water for a single tap. Adding taps to the jar won’t expel more than one gallon exactly and at a steadily decreasing water pressure, no matter how many taps are added to the jar.
From minute to minute the network is finite.
Yes, the Internet is growing daily. However P2P client software and subsequent use is growing faster than anyone could plan for. Therefore, for users to not understand a finite resource needs to be nurtured and not attacked appears to me, to be consumerism at its darkest.
My ISP sells me 6 Mbps therefore if I download 5.9 Mbps for 730 hours per month he is still making a profit.
In my ISP days we calculated utilisation based on the average user utilizing 27 minutes of internet per day. The following year it was 49 minutes per day. The year after 1 hour and five minutes.
The average Internet account was sold on a five dollars per hour basis. So I introduced the 1 cent per minute concept.
It was one cent per minute to connect.
1 cent per minute for VOIP
1 cent per minute downloading from the newsgroups (early filesharing).
And it made billing easy. Time on minus time off times 1 cent per minute; debit credit card simple.
Connection speed? Well was easy, I always made sure my ISP had the fastest modems.
Here comes the crunch we oversold bandwidth by an average of eight times per subscriber. And our profit model was calculated and based on a traditional frame relay model.
8 bits x 8 users = 64 bits per second. (64 bits per second equals a digital datapath measuring unit called a DS0)
If model existed today I’d not be able to oversell my bandwidth due to P2P utilisation of 56 bits per second per user WOW.
But consumers don’t grok this at all.
I was amazed. They genuinely believe if they buy an access port then bandwidth is available to then 24/7 x 365 P.A.
Pssst, I have a secret for you, it’s not. Lets do some boring old sums, and the aforementioned example is a good place to start.
6 Mbps for 49.95 per month.
Yet according to: Digilink in downtown Marina del Rey, CA 90292 – GET A T1 LINK FOR AS LOW AS 275/MO (available for a limited time)
A T1 is only 1.5 Mbps, so something is screwy with Canadian ISP pricing.
According to my mathematics, (and the above users claim about his 6 Mbps DSL connection) an ISP would need four T1′s at $275 per month to service a single
Canadian users home DSL line or outlay $1,100.00 to recoup $49.95 resulting in a $1,050.05 monthly loss.
Of course our example users ISP might be one of the larger ones who is used to buying larger chunks of bandwidth like eg, a T3.
Get a T3 (45Mbps) for less than $3,000/mo
Which equates to 7.5 users at monthly loss of only $350.00 per month per user.
No wonder the ISPs in Canada are asking permission to utilize DPI to throttle Canadian users.
It’s interesting In Australia, we don’t seem to have lack of understanding nor do we have users screaming Net Neutrality.
There’s a lesson in there somewhere.
Possibly the outcome of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) hearings may be Canadians need to be taught the simple economics of bandwidth and what the impact of file sharing is doing to their networks. Could CRTC actually teach users a 6 Mbps IP connection does not equal a 6 Mbps constant download capacity.
Net Neutrality ?
Nope can’t happen with Torrent clients sitting on the network unless someone gets the users together and asks them to voluntarily self regulate.
I said this before in my article Koltai becomes a wowser we need some Net Commandments ..
I think we should start again ..
I <insert name> being of sound mind do hereby understand my 6 Mbps connection is shared by at least eight other people and as a good net citizen I undertake not use more than one eighth of the capacity offered to me on my DSL plan.
However one thing is becoming clear from the hearings Telcos don’t peer are having a hard time justifying there restrictive business practices to the Commission members .
I watch with interest and bated breath.
Tom Koltai – p2pnet
[Koltai is an economist in Sydney Australia. He's says he's been online for 26 years, has run several ISPs and, "lobbied governments in four countries to prevent Internet restrictive usage legislation from being enacted". He says he's a strong believer in P2P, "as being a technological requirement to fully exploit the convergence of telephony with computers and remove the last barriers to human communication and interaction".]
NOTE: Tom, because p2pnet is based in Canada, you seem to be assuming readers are all Canadian. Of course, they’re not. In fact, a lot more are Australian! US, 39.6%; UK, 10.5%, Australia, 7.6%, India 6.0% and Canada, a humble 5.6%. Just thought I’d mention that Cheers! Jon
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It`s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.