Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 23rd Apr 2011 10:20 UTC
Internet & Networking You know all that talk about net neutrality in the US? How for instance Verizon and Google want net neutrality to apply only to something they call the 'wired' internet, which is apparently somehow different from the 'mobile' internet? Well, while you Americans are only talking about it, us Dutch are once again way ahead of the curve: the largest of the three main carriers has announced its intention to start charging extra for services like VoIP, instant messaging, Facebook, and so on, with the other two carriers contemplating similar moves. The dark future of the web, right here in my glorified swamp.
Thread beginning with comment 470882
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Oh boy, I'd be pissed off...
by Dryhte on Sat 23rd Apr 2011 12:15 UTC
Member since:

but they'd never succeed in making me pay (or my company) for the use of any of those 'services' (at least not more than I'm paying now).

I'd just make more use of my phone's wifi connection. And the moment a new provider arises who does not fragment access like that, I'd make sure we move to the less restrictive provider 'sito presto'...

Reply Score: 1

Thom_Holwerda Member since:

I'm a T-Mobile subscriber in The Netherlands, and the moment T-Mobile announces something like this, I'd love to cancel my contract, even if it's mid-contract. However, being a self-employed translator, I MUST have a mobile 3G connection. I can't live without it. The prospect of all carriers here following KPN's footsteps...


Reply Parent Score: 2

Lennie Member since:


T-mobile just doesn't know what it wants to do yet, but I'm sure they or Vodafone will be next:

(articles in Dutch)

You could even say T-mobile was first ?:

Very sad. :-((

Edited 2011-04-23 13:56 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Oh boy, I'd be pissed off...
by saso on Sat 23rd Apr 2011 12:32 in reply to "Oh boy, I'd be pissed off..."
saso Member since:

I work for a mid-sized ISP (a few dozen thousand subscribers) and I can tell you, if we tried to pull this kind of shit here, our customers would basically hang us by the balls. It's equivalent to lowering speeds or raising prices mid-contract - people may be stupid, but they are not *that* stupid. And once they see that you're asking for more money to let them access their beloved FaceTube, which they used to get for the price of their existing contract, you can pretty much spend all the extra money from such a scheme on lawyers, as you'll be flooded with lawsuits.

Reply Parent Score: 6

Flatland_Spider Member since:

As a mid-sized ISP you can't do this, people have choices, but if you were AT&T, or one of the other large carriers with a large base who have no other option, you can pretty much tell your customers to piss up a pole. When they get mad, block any attempts build alternatives with fees, regulations, and paid-for-laws.

Anyway, throttling is a much better way to deal with the issue. Just throttle Facebook and Youtube down to 14.4 modem speeds, and upsell them on a speed package or more expensive plan with expensive prerequisites. To paraphrase a trainer, "If you want them to do something, make the alternative hurt."

Reply Parent Score: 2