NTC holds Public Hearing & Consultation

Hmmmm im half-agreed with the bandwidth capping since there are a lot of abusive users here in the philippines. TELCOS should omit the word “unlimited services” and i already talked to my cuz who is experiencing it, its fine with him:)

i also agreed to the article posted by Kenneth. But who really knows the hidden agenda of the TELCOS. I hope one of the honest and just admin of TELCOS will share something what’s the real deal of bandwidth capping.

Quoted is the long description of Sir doinks:

I love your comment sir and that fuckin’ rocks!!!!

That is the full definition of ISPs!!!!

Imba sir!!!

In response to the reasons:

1. First, this is absurd. I’m pretty sure the contract for residential connections restrict it’s use commercially.

Second, it doesn’t really matter how a residential subscription is used. 1 computer using the full extent of the line uses the same bandwidth as 100 computers sharing it; you cannot get faster speeds or consume more bandwidth than your plan allows.

2. Spot on. Note that the bottom line for the ISPs is to hit a certain amount of revenue. Overselling does not make them unprofitable, just less profitable than what they could be by taking in as many subscribers as they can regardless of the impact too many subscribers will have on the service as a whole. It’s pure greed.

3. This is an outright fabrication. If you are on an unlimited 1Mbps line, it should not be considered an abuse to maximize it’s use since that is exactly what you paid for.

The concept of “abusive users” is made up to act as the ISP’s scapegoat. The reason the network is strained is because there is just too many subscribers on it. You know there’s something wrong with with the network’s capacity when 2% of it’s subscriber base degrades the whole service.

Instead of making excuses and using these so-called abusive users as an excuse to cap bandwidth, they should upgrade their capacity.

4. This is a reason to cap bandwidth? Seriously? If an area is getting more bandwidth than it’s users can consume, the logical thing to do is to re-appropriate this excess bandwidth to areas that need it, not impose bandwidth caps on everyone.

5. Again, pure greed. They know what their network capacity is. It is obvious from the spotty service that the network is already strained as it is and still they want to add even more subscribers in?

I’ll explain the scenario in a metaphor. It’ll be simplistic and not mathematically accurate but the idea is the same.

ISPs are like eat-all-you-can buffets. For example, they buy 100 crates of food. These 100 crates of food can feed 100 people since the few people who eat more than what they pay for are offset by the vast majority who eat less then what they pay for.

So now, the ISPs have been slowly and steadily letting more people in without buying more crates of food. So they end up making much more money with the same amount of crates of food. Of course, with more people eating, there would be less for everyone so people start complaining.

The ISPs in turn, instead of buying more crates of food to accommodate everyone as what is the proper thing for them to do, they start telling people that some of the customers are abusing their eat-all-you-can buffet so they have to start limiting how much everyone eats. So they effectively advertise as an eat-all-you-can buffet and charge people the premium for that and yet rations the food into servings.

This is essentially what the ISPs want to happen here.

oh hi guys, I hope you won’t waste your time going there. Let’s expect for the worst. They will implement capping, let’s just rely on how these telcos compete like Abe’s post about Bayantel’s “generous” 100GB cap limit. Let’s see how other broadband companies will follow and how would they improve their service and competitive prices.

abuse? Let’s see…
I have bots running on different servers and different companies. These bots downloads a full Blu-Ray disc of random TV series…lol…jk!

Got this article link in another forum:

http://stopthecap.com/2010/12/22/bad-analogies-from-msnbc-columnist-illustrate-lazy-journalism-from-a-future-comcast-employee/

In the US, ISPs pushing for capping internet access would not like to compare internet service with the phone/voice service, since mabubuko sila na di talaga kelangan ng cap sa internet service. At ang reason lang talaga nila is solely to increase their profit by selling more subscription to new customers, the cap will allow them to do so w/o needing to upgrade their facilities. Otherwise kasi w/o the cap madami na makakaramdam ng pagdegrade ng services nila.

Yes if its fair. Like 1mbps at 15 pesos per month.
After all japan cost 13 pesos equivalent for every 1mbps a month. while US 1mbps internet cost 166 pesos.

Speed must also be consistently fast.

re: the NTC public hearing

this is a very very iportant issue which affects filipinos all over the country. This should be televised and phone in, text in and IM in questions should be entertained. If not, then the NTC is treating it as if it were a mere local ordinance. People from other parts of the country would be “disenfranchised” so to speak because they would not be able to air their views

Uhm, mga futang ina ninyo. bakit d na lang kayo pumunta imbes na magreklamo? Umm

@moi

Correct me if I am wrong but I guess SUN is the first to have a fair usage policy.

@yuga

Please paki confirm lang po kung ung sun cell eh nag iimplement ng capping. It’s a big issue if SUN does not implement capping and other networks cap their services.

naka-wifi nga ang bahay ko, marami nga nag-internet nang sabay-sabay, nanood nga ako nang anime sa anime video streaming sites habang iba’y nag-facebook, lalagyan nang limit, diba masyadong unfair ang capping, maganda yung 100GB bandwidth cap a month pero dagdagan pa sana para patas, hindi naman kami’y masyadong massive sa kaka-download, upload nang photo’s sa facebook malamang.

yung 384kbps DSL, hindi ka makaka-youtube sa ganyang speed, talagang magagalit ka.

pero huwag lang abusuhin ang technology, learn how to control your craving.

nakaka-degrade daw ang fiber optic sa kaka-uncapped, malamang ayon sa urban legend, isipin na lang yung tubig sa gripo, kung pabaya kayo sa kakabukas at kakatagas, ganoon din sa internet na laging bukas.

I want to go too but I’m in Baguio!!! ano ba yan.. walang ganyan na consultation but buong Pilipinas ang apektado. I’m a homebased medical transcriptionist by profession– putting a cap on my internet connection would hinder me from doing my work. Sa size pa lang ng audio files na kailangan ko, maliit ang allowed bandwidth na yan.

@Maling Akala
Ganda ng website mo ah! 5/5 Stars!

> The bandwidth caps only affect residential accounts.
> Business accounts are not capped.

I wouldn’t be so careless to make that assumption, sir yuga.

As it stands the draft memo makes no such distinction.

5. Service providers may set the maximum volume of data allowed per subscriber/user per day.

Nowhere in the document does it differentiate between residential and business accounts. Just because Bayantel set their corporate accounts as uncapped does not mean that’s how the rest of the telcos agreed to bandwidth capping with the NTC.

I’ll go for no cap but pay as you use service!! :)

Hindi ako pupunta small time blogger pa lang ako. tsaka na kapag kasing lupet na ako kay sir Abe…

Pls sir ABE air our side.

Sometimes I telecommute. I use my residential subscription to access my files at the office. These are massive databases so the 800mb cap of Globe may not be enough.

Pls sir. Be our voice.

@BrownBear

Mas tarantado pag mali ang post, eena mo, haha

@isonski e tarantado ka pala eh, wala naman palang laman yang utak mo.

yang pinagmamalaki mong “totoong internet working-class heroes, sa mga sysads, network admins, developers/programmers, project leads, MIS/IT/ICT personnel and techs” sila ang unang-unang maaapektuhan nang capping na ito.

hindi mo alam kung pano? eh natural hindi mo malalaman kasi obvious naman na panggap ka lang na “totoong internet working-class”. letche may nalalaman ka pang “totoong internet working-class”, EEEENNNNAAAAMOOOO!!!!

Who will go on this hearing?

If capping works, then there should be no wi-tribe subscriber who is plagued by slow speeds, even if the cap has not been reached yet. Do you see that happening?

Right now, I’m on the fence with the idea but who knows what this could lead to in terms of future applications. It might not matter to me now, but it may, eventually.

I think what people should talk less about “sob stories” and present options.

the articles of broadband capping is for mobile broadband internet right?

how about the NTC hearing? is it also for mobile broadband or ALL types of broadband?

Hahaha… I can’t believe I’m actually considering ditching work to go to this public hearing. I still got a week to think about it.. O.o

NO! to broadband capping!!

i wanna go, pero taga La Union ako.. :(