First talked about Caschy that the blog has bremerhaven.de city- operates with a pronounced success (and not yet lifted with his personality, which is only mentioned in passing). Issue is this: In the telecom lame Youtube . That to me is also often been noticed, but I had thought that this would be somehow to me or my leadership. Finally, I have only DSL 3000 (paid for 6000 but we do thank you!). Following statements by the current Basic Thinking article there were at least a 3-digit number of affirmative comments. The issue is burning so.
Praiseworthy is already following times: The Telecom has responded quickly and a published opinion . In short: The Youtube consumption is huge. So vast that the networks can no longer afford this. Removing the need to Gedraht to make it to the user is comfortable again. The only catch here, you may think you have it: the cost. And indeed a lot. Now the telecom is not one of the lowest bidder, of course. But in the end run, the other providers that have cheaper fares on their networks. The need to pay anything for the network expansion. Now the telecom is not willing to bear the financial burden alone. The question now is who will pay?
Customers could pay. Yes they do now, but it could be something more. For example, a package for Youtube. Or generally for the use of video-sharing sites. But that would be an outcry, I guess. On the other hand, the mobile network, there are also charges for the use of Skype. Even if the meaning of the Skype package than the high volume of data, but rather is there to ignore the refinance of normal calls, so it's basically the same.
Another suggestion from my side: instead of the customers could be asked the other network providers to pay. How about the fact that any provider that has one customer accounted for more than 5%, using the telecom network, a percentage of the nets must spend?
Yet another proposal, this time at the expense of net neutrality (?): The Content Provider must resort to self-fund. What that means is that the big polluters to pay a traffic part of the conduits. Finally, they collect huge amounts of advertising money. The question here is, of course, where you draw the line. I personally think that only the major traffic edges should also be paid to the start-ups have a harder yet.
Of this time from: What do you think about the last idea? Is that unfair to the content industry? A goofy idea that's not the end. Trucks must indeed pay toll. So what was wrong with asking to Youtube to checkout? Finally, it will benefit the users of it (and of course the telecoms because they do not have to pay the network expansion alone). The net neutrality is not compromised in my opinion, because in the end is not so preferably a video service. At least I hope. You have to read just because the fine print in the contracts.
At the end of a small survey:
Loading ... 
