| |
David Eaton wrote:
> Well, you're in essence correct in that bandwidth should be charged for, but I
> just don't like the per-packet idea... I think that per-packet charges should
> come in only for those who "need" it, or those who abuse it (as a fine, rather
> than a service) My only real issue on this is that people in general (myself
> included, certainly) make a lot of repeated clicks, etc... I go out and reload
> a page (Netscape does it automatically sometimes) very frequently.. or I'll
> click around a whole lot, back to pages I've already seen for reference, etc.
> Charging per-packet means I'd be paying for those casual random clicks, despite
> the fact that I'm not really causing a problem or anything... and hence I don't
> want to pay for it (like any red-blooded American! :) )... Instead I like the
> idea of paying for excessive bandwidth-- hence, you can charge people who try
> and overload sites, people who send excessive amounts of spam, etc... Of course
> major servers would be expected to pay more, and things like AOL would have to
> keep track of it, but then again, they're perfectly welcome (even at present)
> to charge whatever they want for individual packets.... Anyway, that's my
> general feeling, based on the American dream of getting something for nothing,
> but hey, I can still want it, right? That's why they call it the American
> "dream"!
I don't think your random clicks will be a problem when time comes to
charge per packet. I expect that the rates will be so miniscule that
casual browsing will be free (the problem might be that it won't do
enough to spam because it won't cost all that much - until of course
they start e-mailing you video clips and crud).
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: eBay nailed?
|
| (...) Yep, that sounds like exactly what I'd want to do-- keep tabs on who's sending the most requests and if they look suspicious, deny them access, rather than have a flat "no more than X transactions per Y time", seeing as how you might get (...) (25 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
13 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
