Welcome to P2PNET.net - The original daily p2p and digital news site. Always First!
Register | Login
RIAA News
Cool Stuff
MPAA News
Games / Consoles
News
Music
Movies
TV
Open Source
Mobiles
Advertising
Product News
P2P
Off Topic
Freedom
Politics
Interviews
Security
DRM
Links
p2pnet Digests
Search: 
Search
 
Web P2PNET   
Search: 
Search
Torrent Site Tracker
MP3 Rocket
Add real-time p2pnet headlines to YOUR site ! Click here to download our newsfeed code
p2pnet - rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | p2pnet celebrities: http://p2pnet.net/celeb.rss | Mobile? http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php

AT&T pleads poverty

p2pnet news | P2P:- AT&T says if it doesn’t get billions of dollars in fresh cash by 2010, it’ll have reached the limits of network capacity.

At least $55 billion is needed for investment in new infrastructure in the next three years in the US alone, with the figure rising to $130 billion to improve the network worldwide, according to the company’s Jim Cicconi (right), quoted by CNET News.

He was speaking at a Westminster eForum on Web 2.0 this week in London, declaring, “The surge in online content is at the center of the most dramatic changes affecting the Internet today. In three years’ time, 20 typical households will generate more traffic than the entire Internet today.”

The “unprecedented new wave of broadband traffic” would increase 50-fold by 2015 with AT&T investing $19 billion to maintain its network and upgrade its backbone network, said Cicconi, stating, “There is nothing magic or ethereal about the Internet - it is no more ethereal than the highway system.”

Cicconi didn’t actually utter the dread term, “Net neutrality,” but, “some audience members tackled him on the issue in a question-and-answer session, asking whether the subtext of his speech was really around prioritizing some kinds of traffic”.

For “prioritizing” read “throttling” and for “some kinds of traffic” read P2P file sharing.

“The reason I resist using the term ‘Net neutrality’ is that I don’t think government intervention is the right way to do this kind of thing,” he said, according to the story, going on, ” I don’t think government can anticipate these kinds of technical problems. Right now, I think Net neutrality is a solution in search of a problem.”

Net neutrality, “refers to an ongoing campaign calling for governments to legislate to prevent Internet service providers from charging content providers for prioritization of their traffic,” says CNET.

“The debate is more heated in the United States than in the United Kingdom because there is less competition between ISPs in the States.”

It’s also raging in Canada where the major ISPs are using blatant traffic ‘management’ to throttle accounts they say are sapping more than their fair share of bandwith.

Slashdot it! Add to Technorati Favorites Stumble It!

CNET News - AT&T: Internet to hit full capacity by 2010, April 18, 2008
throttle accounts - p2pnet traffic shaping digest, April 19, 2008


Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!

Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile - http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php


Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.

HOME

7 Responses to “AT&T pleads poverty”

  1. Reader's Write Says:

    From ArsTechnica:

    Analyst Daniel Beringer argued in a 2006 article that network maintenance and upgrade expenditures are a lower priority for AT&T than attaining monopoly control of the market through acquisitions. “The Bells only invest in more monopoly which usually means buying each other. The track record shows steadily lower spending on networks to increase free cash flow for acquisitions. The $140 billion SBC spent acquiring Ameritech, PacBell, SNET, AT&T Wireless, and AT&T lifted the company’s market cap by only $40 billion,” wrote Beringer. “SBC missed an opportunity as $140 billion happens to be about what it would cost to run fiber to every home in America.”

  2. Reader's Write Says:

    Powerty? - NO WAI!

  3. Mostly Harmless Says:

    Jim “Facts Schmacts” Cicconi states, “20 typical households will generate more traffic than the entire Internet today.” Um, if that is really true they will need a brazillion billion dollars… If this guy expects anybody to take him seriously he cannot make idiotic statements like that.

  4. Reader's Write Says:

    Mostly Harmless,

    The statement about 20 houses generating more traffic than the whole internet is of course, based on them purchasing ‘high definition’ content from att and watching/listening to it 24/7. Of course 90+% of the ‘data’ will be the DRM overhead.

  5. Reader's Write Says:

    Then we can solve that problem. Just need to do some marketing for Bittorrent and DVD-rips and against DRM and “att high definition content” - and the bandwidth problem is solved.

  6. Rekrul Says:

    “The reason I resist using the term ‘Net neutrality’ is that I don’t think government intervention is the right way to do this kind of thing,” he said, according to the story, going on, ” I don’t think government can anticipate these kinds of technical problems. Right now, I think Net neutrality is a solution in search of a problem.”

    Translation: “The reason I resist using the term ‘Net neutrality’ is that I don’t think government intervention would be good for our long-term plans,” he said, according to the story, going on, ” I don’t think government will be sympathetic to our goal of using the net as a distribution platform for premium content. Right now, I think Net neutrality is a huge thorn in our sides.”

  7. Stray Mongrel Says:

    I would like to see the internet infrastructure based entirely on WiFi, eliminating most of the need for any central ISP to begin with.

    Technology seems to be making many corporations obsolete (at least under their current business model), and they are “clawing at the insides of the coffin”, so to speak.

Leave a Reply

    Advertisments
Blubster
teksavvy2