Canadians Just Became World's Biggest Internet Losers. • Hacker News Board

Re: Canadians Just Became World's Biggest Internet Losers.

#121

Post by cal5k » Sun, Jan 30, 2011, 8:12 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #18

JeffJenkins wrote: post #5

This doesn't explaining what's going on very clearly. Small Canadian ISPs are allowed to use the infrastructure of Bell Canada at wholesale rates in order to foster competition. This has been reasonably successful. What has happened now is that the CRTC ruled that Bell is allowed to impose the same per-user bandwidth caps on its wholesale customers as it does on its own users. Since the smaller ISPs should simply be…

The Canadian government has a long history of propping up the monopolies operating inside its borders, especially when it has a stake in them. For additional entertainment read up on the LCBO and the Egg Board (no, that's not a joke).

Not to mention the Canadian Wheat Board, perhaps the most egregious of all monopsonies (apparently it's not a "monopoly" because it is the only BUYER of wheat).

Re: Canadians Just Became World's Biggest Internet Losers.

#122

Post by GrooveStomp » Sun, Jan 30, 2011, 8:33 PM UTC

gyom wrote: post #118

samatman wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A total OT, but is "pardon my French" at all PC in Canada? Serious question!

I'm a French Canadian guy working in an English workplace and I feel a bit insulted whenever I hear this expression. I never hear anyone complain about it, but it makes me want to start saying "pardon my English" right after belching loudly (on purpose for that occasion). The only thing keeping me from doing that is that I don't think people would make the connection and understand the reference. I don't know how Jew…

I think I've heard "Pardon my English" before too. I wouldn't be at all offended if I heard that term. In fact, I'll make a point of using it in the future. :)

Re: Canadians Just Became World's Biggest Internet Losers.

#123

Post by Dramatize » Sun, Jan 30, 2011, 8:33 PM UTC

Welcome to Australia

Re: Canadians Just Became World's Biggest Internet Losers.

#124

Post by gregsadetsky » Sun, Jan 30, 2011, 8:34 PM UTC

How expensive would it be to start a number of small independent Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs)?

I'm thinking of a decentralized "movement" of geeks organizing what's required to get neighborhoods and villages online: an omnidirectional antenna high enough that Line of Sight can be provided to most residents, a high bandwidth fiber optics connection at the center, and subscriber antennas at the residences.

I've tried to find more information on Motorola Canopy technology in the past days -- look at this example deployment in Nova Scotia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadband_for_Rural_Nova_Scotia...

From what I'm gathering, Canopy can be deployed over unlicensed frequencies (2.4 and 5 Ghz), allows for hundreds of subscribers connecting to a single Access Point, can provide up bandwidth in the 5-10 Mbps range, etc.

Are there particular advantages to Canopy over 802.11x? Could it become viable, with infrastructure costs spread over some years, to run a small local WISP? I'm thinking of a "Real Internet" designation/"certification" that could be given out to any ISP that follows a basic code of conduct: offers at least one unlimited transfer connection plan and does not throttle traffic.

Is starting an ISP, regardless of the physical layer, overly regulated by CRTC? The Wikipedia page says "The CRTC does not regulate rates, quality of service issues, or business practices for Internet service providers" -- is that in effect true?

How can anyone manage with 25 GB per month? Are Netflix or the NFB going to do something about this? If not, can "we"?

Re: Canadians Just Became World's Biggest Internet Losers.

#125

Post by Swannie » Sun, Jan 30, 2011, 8:40 PM UTC

pyre wrote: post #92

Swannie wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But FibeTV is bits over their private infrastructure... they can choose how to charge that, no? The other bits that they are charging for are ones that go "outside" of their network. Usage based charging will become the norm, just like with electricity, water, oil/natural gas, food. Some supermarkets carry loss leaders, why should Bell.ca not be allowed to too?

There are a number of issues here: 1) Does Bell really pay money for their peering arrangements? Is Bell paying for all of the bandwidth between their network and the rest of the Internet? Or are their peering arrangements much like other backbone providers' peering arrangements where it's a handshake and no money changes hands? Is the 'cost' that Bell says that it pays for outside internet access really the cost of…

1) Does it matter if they pay for their peering arrangements? (See who they peer with here: http://www.datacentermap.com/as/577_upstreams.html ). They still need to carry this traffic to a peering location. That's not free. They still need to support their peering agreements with staff & seriously expensive routers. Not free. They need to support the ISP's whose traffic they are carrying - arguably they ISP's have paid for this, but per GB pricing is fair. It is cheaper to run the content over their own network. They will run over an internal CDN, reducing transit costs to a fraction of say Netflix.

2) I think there is some misunderstanding. The way I read all these articles, the problem is the link from the exchange to the provider PoP, and not in the local loop.

Bell got the nod from the regulator 3 months ago to do capacity based charging on links from the exchange to the ISP PoP. If it follows the same model as elsewhere in the world, this is usually on a wholesale, per customer basis. If the ISP in question used a 3rd party supplier then they bypass this cost. Unfortunately it appears that Bell can say no to the ISP leasing fiber capacity from exchange to PoP, which IS abusing their monopoly position.

The point is they are establishing a precedent. Even if their network is not overloaded at the moment (I suspect it's getting there) it will be soon. If a web company has to pay per GB of transit from Amazon EC2, but not within the AWS network, why should charging at a communications provider be different?

Re: Canadians Just Became World's Biggest Internet Losers.

#126

Post by GrooveStomp » Sun, Jan 30, 2011, 8:42 PM UTC

transition wrote: post #62

Would be interesting to see if companies like Google, who have a significant stake in a "free and open internet", could establish operations in Canada. Google wants users online as much as possible so they can continue to serve ads. It's too bad all that dark fiber they own doesn't extend into Canada.

Google has three offices in Canada: http://www.google.com/corporate/address.html

Re: Canadians Just Became World's Biggest Internet Losers.

#127

Post by SaintSal » Sun, Jan 30, 2011, 8:44 PM UTC

This reminds me of when the Canadian RIAA (CRIA) successfully campaigned the Canadian government for a "levy" on all blank data media in 2002. They wanted to charge an extra $21 per GB on CDs, DVDs and hard drives in digital media player - ostensibly to cover the costs of piracy. Sound silly? Canadian legislators obliged (though it was overturned in court years later.)

http://news.dmusic.com/article/4580

As I recall, this backfired since the levy eventually meant that they couldn't sue people for pirating content - they had already paid for it via the levy. Like double jeopardy.

Anyway, it proved that levies like this don't actually change behaviour much. Canadians drove to the US to buy their MP3 players. Telcos benefitted by online media consumption and competed heavily for broadband subscribers. Digital lifestyles in Canada flourished.

Ironically, it's now the telcos that are complaining for the same reason. The key difference now is that big telcos can use this decision to squeeze their competitors (who they also supply.) Though I can see ways that this will backfire too.

The good thing about the Canadian government is that they have a history of continually watching, listening, adjusting and even backtracking if they feel they made the wrong move. I hope this keeps the telcos from abusing their new rights, and from stifling digital innovation in Canada, which hurts them too in the long run.

Re: Canadians Just Became World's Biggest Internet Losers.

#128

Post by fyrerise » Sun, Jan 30, 2011, 8:55 PM UTC

sjs wrote: post #86

jacquesm wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a reason why lots of technical people from Canada seek to find their fortune in the United States.

This situation really sucks, but remember that those of us with Telus or Shaw don't have anything to complain about at the moment so you aren't hearing about all of us on 10-25 mbps lines, with 50-200 GB soft caps that aren't enforced. I'm torrenting up a storm 24/7, and regularly download shows and movies on iTunes and Netflix, stream Grooveshark at home and on my phone. I don't even hear anything if I use 2x my mon…

This isn't accurate. Shaw has recently jumped on the same bandwagon and started enforcing hard caps with overage fees. Just go here if you want to check that:

http://www.shaw.ca/en-ca/ProductsServices/Internet/High-Spee...

($2.00/GB for each GB used above plan’s limit)

AFAIK, Telus isn't doing yet, but I've heard that this is a technical limitation rather than lack of desire to do so.

Re: Canadians Just Became World's Biggest Internet Losers.

#129

Post by secret » Sun, Jan 30, 2011, 8:59 PM UTC

samatman wrote: post #56

wildmXranat wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Most online services that have a presence in Canadian market will start to see cuts in their revenue. I was using NetFlix, but no longer. Many of my friends and co-workers are not using Dropbox for backup anymore. It makes no sense. Many went back to good old fashioned portable drives. In addition to purchasing less of online services, many people that I know refuse to buy anything from Bell and Rogers. No cable…

A total OT, but is "pardon my French" at all PC in Canada? Serious question!

My old boss was born and raised in France and would use that expression all the time. She thought it was funny.

Re: Canadians Just Became World's Biggest Internet Losers.

#130

Post by zacharycohn » Sun, Jan 30, 2011, 9:00 PM UTC

skymt wrote: post #112

neonfunk wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually agree with metering; I think it's the only fair measure. Granted, the metering you describe sounds atrocious, and there'll probably be a long messy transition to the point where our internet bill is more like our electric bill. But imagine this: on mobile networks, instead of voice minutes, text messages, data caps, fees for tethering, and every other scheme the Telcos are concocting right now (with regard…

Universal bandwidth metering would certainly incentivize moderation. For starters, it would immediately kill the Internet advertising industry, as just about every Internet user would moderate the bandwidth they spend on ads by installing Adblock Plus.

You could look at nothing but google ads for a month and your bandwidth wouldn't be near what it'd be if you had just watched a single HD movie over netflix.