[Nottingham] Hosting your own domain/s?

nottingham@mailman.lug.org.uk nottingham at mailman.lug.org.uk
Tue Jul 8 11:17:01 2003


Quoting Kus <oy990@yokozuna.co.jp>:

Flamebait, but...

> If I pay for a service, I intend to use it. Ntlhome isnt CHEAP you know.
> 25.99 a month + 75 installation fee eats into the pocket of a student quite
> merrily. 

CHEAP is a relative term.  I'm not aware of anyone who charges less, so NTL are 
cheap.  And even if something was considered 'expensive', that doesn't confer 
rights beyond fair usage.  NTL are free to define this fair usage in any way 
they like - if you don't like it then you are free to move to an ISP who see 
your idea of fair use as commercially viable.  Good luck finding one.

> Not mentioning all the cat53 to wire up the house, the time, the effort.  
> Business ADSL can costs hundreds, even thousands after you factor in all the  
> hidden charges in the small print.

Exactly.  The service which NTL offer for ~25.99 is designed for home users, 
implying a certain level of usage.  NTL are showing an act of faith by turning 
a blind eye to the multiple users.  The fact that business class pipes are so 
expensive is at least partly due to the fact that they'll be using more data.

> 
> As for degrading the service to others, do you think they arent all doing the
> same thing? I live in a student area, most houses contain not less than 5
> computers all downloading and uploading gigs a
> day.

Ok, that means that these customers individually are not profitable to NTL, and 
from their point of view they have nothing to lose.  There is a cost associated 
with every mb you transfer.  At some point this reaches a critical value where 
you equal a loss to NTL.  

> 
> Co-location is overkill for a shell and ftp. Maybe if you're an organization
> with an agenda and a purpose, whatever no worries go for it. If you're just a
> home user who shares a few movies and
> miscellaneous files with his friends .. whats the point? Indeed I was under
> the impression that *was* the point of residential cable network services.
> 

This is very telling, and it's where the problem is IMO.  The broadband 
providers were all too ready to market their services in terms of multimedia 
transfer.  

> In my view if you want to base an argument on fair usage, then limit the
> usage, charge accordingly, make it clear and enforce your *organised*
> policies. NTL being the regional franchise it is, that
> will never happen. And we can only look to the government (ha ha) for some
> better more competative legislation on commercial non-business home broadband
> services. 

Or maybe the government should just enforce their copyright legislation.  That 
would cure the problem.

> 
> Kus.
> http://slashdot.org
> 

Ben