Public Voice Network
- What are you listening to… 56445644
- Black People :/ 192192
- PRISM 9292
- Halp! I need a photograph… 4646
- Superman: Man of Steel 6868
- NBC Failure? 22
- Hannibal TV series 88
- Vid of the Day 1529915299
- PS4 vs X-Box One 4848
- Video Games... 998998
- Pic of the Day 7542575425
- FMT140613 1616
- This typeface - Terminal? 33
- blog 5785657856
- RIP James Gandolfini 3434
- Suggest a good movie... 12291229
- Four tet is Burial 1818
- I am Bradley Manning 1717
- Trailer Of The Day 818818
- RIP Tony Soprano 66
- instagram 673673
- QBN Stickers? 55
- Chick of the Day 1831218312
- The Million Dollar YouTub… 2222
Help Canada not get screwed by our ISPs 6767 Responses
Last post: 2 years, 4 months ago | Thread started: Jan 28, 11, 11:05 p.m.
- decisionman
This means we're looking at a future where ISPs will charge per byte, the way they do with smart phones. If we allow this to happen Canadians will have no choice but to pay MUCH more for less Internet
- Jan 28, 11, 11:05 p.m. – Permalink
- prophetone
just signed it and i suggest all the other tim horton drinkin' qbners do the same, asap.

- Dog-earJan 28, 11, 11:31 p.m. – Permalink
- prophetone
here's a quick scenario. just today i downloaded the latest apple xcode/sdk package at 3GB and change. apple doesn't allow the simple updating of the previous version to keep the downloads small so you're forced into it. i'm not going to be charged for this beyond my monthly bill. but what if next time i have to consider this will cost me $20-30 EXTRA on my bill. that situation will suck big time. and then there's the lovable huggable netflix. take a wild guess what will happen with that service.


- Dog-earJan 28, 11, 11:42 p.m. – Permalink
- decisionman
@brodster – There'll be no riot. No bang, just a whimper :)

- Dog-earJan 29, 11, 12:13 a.m. – Permalink
- abettertomorrow
Trust me if this happened in the U.S. there would in fact be riot

- Dog-earJan 29, 11, 12:17 a.m. – Permalink
- decisionman
@abettertomorrow – Maybe I'm just cynical, but... no, there won't be.

- Dog-earJan 29, 11, 12:22 a.m. – Permalink
- abettertomorrow
@decisionman – Sorry to disagree but, Yes, there will be


- Dog-earJan 29, 11, 12:23 a.m. – Permalink
- abettertomorrow
Is there an "unlimited data" plan?


- Dog-earJan 29, 11, 12:24 a.m. – Permalink
- abettertomorrow
Because if so, I would go for that


- Dog-earJan 29, 11, 12:24 a.m. – Permalink
- decisionman
Dunno. I better keep of QBN for the time being. Using up precious kbs.
See you on the BBS!

- Dog-earJan 29, 11, 12:32 a.m. – Permalink
- prophetone
i guess if it comes down to it i'll have to fire up the imsai and my cat 14.4 and ascii-image psb battle with you first-worlders like it's 1985.


- Dog-earJan 29, 11, 12:42 a.m. – Permalink
- pizzafire
here's an interesting scenario:
"The assignment: to build a website, rich in video and interactive features, that would outline to the public the benefits of a huge proposed infrastructure project.
The discussions kept getting derailed by the same concern. In Canada, many Internet customers have strict limits on the amount of data they can download and upload. If they go over those limits, Internet providers such as BCE Inc.’s (BCE-T) Bell Canada unit and Rogers Communications Inc., (RCI.B-T) charge them extra fees. Would this website actually use up too much of the Internet?"


- Dog-earJan 29, 11, 5:36 a.m. – Permalink
- prophetone

- Dog-earJan 29, 11, 11:12 a.m. – Permalink
- monNom
Congratulations, you found Netflick's PR campaign.
You have ALWAYS had a bandwidth limit on your internet connection. When it was dial-up, you paid by the minute. With broad band, you have a quota 10-100gigs download depending on your package, and a fraction of that upload. If you go over, you get a warning (p2p users have run into this for years). and eventually get billed or cut-off. This makes perfect sense because if the telcos need to build out the last mile to deliver 1 terabyte to ever house each month instead of 100BGig, it's going to cost a whole lot more (though maybe not 10x ).
Netflicks doesn't like this cause it makes them a fucking joke up here. 7.99 for some movies that you aren't interested in, but that's all they have, and an extra $30 on your internet bill. You're better off doing 'on demand' or renting (or subscribing for a movie channel).
My thinking: pay for what you use, don't ask you neighbours to subsidize your downloads because you found what you thought was a loophole.

- Dog-earJan 29, 11, 12:44 p.m. – Permalink




