[naoqj]

That's the joke. People and corporations streaming HD video use a disproportionate amount of bandwidth which require more hardware capacity and peering deals. I think it's not crazy to ask that they pay a fair price for it. As someone who doesn't stream HD video I would like to have cheaper connections available if I don't want to pay for the bandwidth usage of other customers.

[smachiz]

Hah. That isn't really the issue.

Ballpark FMV for 1Mbps for a month is currently around $0.08/Mbps in the US at scale in carrier neutral datacenter.

If you watched a Netflix HD stream all month long, it would cost maybe $1.

But of course it doesn't actually cost Verizon or ATT or Cox that - Netflix almost assuredly *pays them* to carry that stream.

Blaming the users is a ridiculously bad take - the issue is that the ISP didn't invest in fixing their last mile, or is needlessly congested at their head end, and they could fix it for trivial amounts of money.

[naoqj]

Increasing bandwidth in the last mile is not cheap at all.

[smachiz]

Depends on the technology and where that limit is.

Increasing bandwidth to the cable head end or FTTN? Trivial.

Replacing DOCSIS 2 equipment with 3.2 equipment? More expensive.

Running actual FTTH? Hard, large upfront costs, but you have an asset with a 30+ year life span that’s cheaper to maintain than copper.

[sambull]

There are. There are 5Mbps/10Mbps connections, that while being unusable for streaming HD are FAR cheaper and usable for other services.

The consumer is paying the price of what they can get out of the connection. Conversely I pay extra (higher bandwidth pipe) so I can stream more HD videos, and even extra so I can do so without a overages fee per GB after a TB.

The consumer in this case just paid to have a bigger pipe (more HD videos) and a use more data (unlimited bandwidth fee extra).

Over $100 a month extra to stream more HD videos, and to not get double the bill just for going over on bandwidth.

[hansel_der]

typical hd-steam (720p) is around 2Mbps

[imtringued]

>I would like to have cheaper connections available if I don't want to pay for the bandwidth usage of other customers.

The anti net neutrality argument is all about taking that freedom away from you. ISPs don't want to change their business model. They want to offer up to X mbit/s but they don't even want to guarantee 5 mbit/s. If there was net neutrality ISPs would be forced to offer plans that are only partially oversubscribed not 100% oversubscribed.

If you wanted a 5mbit/s plan the ISP would still oversubscribe and you would get screwed over by them.