What you don't know about your broadband subscription - Pt. 3
Not hot off the press since this was about two weeks ago. But every time I try to stream a video, my temper starts to flare up so let me write this third installment of the "broadband subscription" series.
In a not-so-surprising move, Globe telecom announced that they have updated their fair use policy on broadband usage. To quote the news report:
The usage cap would affect only users who download data in excess of 1 gigabyte a day, or the equivalent of about 250 MP3 songs. “Globe implemented a policy that promotes a more responsible way of using the Internet that will ensure fair and optimum usage of its broadband services across all subscribers,” the company said.
via inquirer.net
Don't be mislead by the "equivalent of about 250 MP3 songs" analogy. In today's internet surfing habits of majority of its users, 1 GB a day can be very limiting. We are in the cusp of cloud computing where the bits of data we are accessing are mostly stored in the cloud now instead of locally. We stream more videos than ever before, we view more pictures and other images thanks to Flickr and Facebook.
Years ago, we only enter a URL in our browser and then the browser downloads the bits of data to your computer for several seconds to a few minutes. When it's done, the downloading stops. You read what's on your browser, view the pictures, enjoy the GIFs and flash animations. When you click a link, it downloads data again and then stops.
However, since the advent of web 2.0 computers are now more tethered and connected to the internet all the time that there's almost no offline time anymore and that easily racks up the amount of data you are consuming. This makes "pushing" email virtually in real time even though you are only using webmail (e.g., GMail, Yahoomail). This makes instant Facebook notifications appear at the bottom left of your browser if there's some activity on your wall. You can pretty much blame web 2.0 for your wall posts and comments that start to appear like YM chat conversations because the comments appear even without refreshing the page on your browser.
Globe can impose this "fair-use" policy because there is no law that prevents this or makes this illegal. But more than that, what really is disturbing is that the two main reasons they are citing for this change in policy is astounding. Below, I will attempt to discredit both of them.
Fair and optimum usage across all subscribers (the bandwidth-is-a-finite-resource argument)
ISPs, mainly Globe, reasons that 80% of the bandwidth is being consumed by only 20% of their users. I have not really seen the actual analysis but let us assume that there's some very good method and data that Globe has in possession of that led them to this conclusion. They are saying that bandwidth, just like water or electricity, is a finite resource and that only a handful of its subscribers are consuming majority of it. That is the problem: Bandwidth is not a finite resource just like water or electricity. We don't really consume bandwidth, we consume data. These data are owned by owners of wherever you are getting the data from - YouTube, Facebook and other websites. These are not owned by ISPs. Bandwidth is what the ISPs provide which enables us to access/process those data from the internet.
One blogger explains it:
It can’t be finite because we’re talking about the rate that data is processed. It is the rate that your wireless router can process information. It is the rate the junction or the routers of your Service Provider processes information. It is the rate by which telcos transfer data from their servers out on to the world.
via propinoy.net
The real problem is that their technology and infrastructure could not handle the rate of data their consumers are trying to get. The consumers are only trying to get what they're paying for, mind you. The problem is that the ISPs have been advertising and offering a certain bandwidth (1 mbps unlimited, for example) but did not really expect their consumers to actually maximize those advertised rates. I think that's just stupid. It's like selling eat-all-you-can privileges to twenty people but the food is actually only enough for ten.
Porn and piracy
In the news article, they insinuate that part of the reason why they are implementing the change in policy is that some of their subscribers are just horny pirates:
Globe cited study done by Envisional which showed that close to 36% of torrent downloads was pornography and another 48% was movies and television shows. The study further claimed that 23.8% of global Internet traffic is piracy-related and nearly one-quarter of the traffic on the Internet involves the unauthorized distribution of copyrighted materials such as movies, TV shows, music, and video games.
Look, I appreciate the ISPs concern on pornography but that is just none of their business. As far as I know, porn is not illegal. Whatever the users are doing with their bandwidth as long as it is legal is no longer the concern of Globe and other ISPs.
Piracy though is a different thing. Yes it is illegal but you don't limit 100% of all traffic just because about a quarter of that is illegal. I may not personally like it but if the ISPs are really concerned about piracy, what they should do is to start blacklisting torrent sites from their DNS servers.
In conclusion, another thing that we do not know about our broadband subscriptions (and now we know) is that even though ISPs are selling these high bandwidth packages, they are not really high bandwidth at all since these are or will be capped. It is just another of those unethical business practices of false advertising, not informing customers of the fine print, changing the rules in the middle of the contract and citing incredulous reasons. Where in fact this is just all about the bottom line: profits.
* image courtesy of hometoys.com
