Where I talk about the usage based billing stuff and sound crazy while doing it. There's a Star Trek reference! (only one though)

I know a bunch of people (and likely if you're Canadian and/or living in the Greater Toronto area, so do you)who are going downtown today for the rally against usage based billing on their internet access.

I haven't brought this up anywhere else yet- because I don't need to go looking for a fight- but I can't really take this cause seriously.

The people I hear the most about this from are also the most frivolous users of the internet. The news report I saw on the situation had a couple of young gamers describing the fact that when they aren't on their X-Box online, then they were streaming movies to watch- that they couldn't imagine their lives without their unlimited access. Then there was a gentleman who ran a business at home, whose needs are actually legitimate, but simply didn't sell his position. It didn't sound like he'd be hurt all that bad, in spite of what he actually said.

Could be it was a report designed to make the protesters look ridiculous, or more likely a case of slapdash "anyone know ANYONE that'll go on camera about this?" reporting.

I hear from environmentalists about how the cost for the electricity and water we enjoy in this country is, what, roughly double what we actually pay (man, I'm just guessing, I totally forget... it's more than what we pay, okay?)- but they can't raise the prices because the people feel entitled, and to even mention it to any serious extent would be political suicide.

I do enjoy the current cost of things, and yes, I take advantage of it, but if someone were to say to me "okay, now you have to pay the ACTUAL cost" I would ultimately be okay with that. If for no other reason than it would help teach me (and others) conservation and appreciation.

All that said, it sure does sound like I'm against the Usage Based Billing protestors, doesn't it? Well, that isn't the case.

Even I, with my limited computer knowledge, can appreciate the scale difference of going from uhhh my mind just blanked on the numbers AND units... like 250 sprazillion to only 25 brazillian fiber optics-

I'm probably hurting my credibility using such goofy words for the units, but it made me smile, and really, units are just words, placeholder ideas for other ideas/realities.

Anyway, it's a huge difference. And while there's a case for more electricity controls- say the blackouts that happen during the summer due to over taxing of the system, with less frivolous electricity use we can keep the power we need (for the elderly and sick for example) with less chance of losing it at the worst possible time. A market based series of restrictions (higher cost) is one way too achieve that. I'd rather we just turned things off on our own accord, but seeing as I doubt that'll happen, higher pricing is one solution.

But go back to the internet problem... well, there really isn't any. At least none that the major service providers will admit to. I seem to recall back in the earliest days of the last decade people talking about systems not being able to handle the number of people surfing the web, but I haven't heard anything like this (outside of cyber-rebellion) for a long time- whch makes sense, given the leaps in technology we've achieved (we... as if I did anything. I'll make a computer engineer a sandwich. "Okay, you're a sandwich!").

Considering that, here's one scenario where the proposed usage based billing increase is (moderately) okay: the various internet providers have reached their limit, none can offer more 'internetz' because as it stands "she can nay take anymore" and if ANY provider admited to this problem their users would jump ship to another group. The potential loss of subscribers to one provider versus the potential gain in subscribers to another is too great a financial incentive for these bottom line businesses to admit to anything, when they're ALL feeling the strain.

So they ALL go to a governing body- the CRTC- to be the bad guy. "Sorry folks, gotta take more money from ya." This solves the entire problem, giving some slack on the number of users and getting money to improve infrastructure. Of course it LOOKS like a simple cash grab.

Still, that's a shady bit of price fixing, a slippery slope at the hills bottom to monopoly.

But yes, THAT was the good scenario- where the parties involved feel they can't be honest without being taken advantage of and therefore attempt to take advantage of others preemptively.

The simplest and most likely scenario is that it is just a cash grab. And that's no good in my books.

If I have to choose between corrupt cash counters or LOLing layabouts- I'll choose the latter.

Now get off my lawn or I'll bean you with alliteration!
Lousy kids with their pet rocks and tamagucci's...