Given the recent emergence of high-definition video streamed to every home, it seems like three times that probably wouldn't be enough.
EDIT: Capitalization error, mbps > MBps.
Ya, but you didn't do that. 1TB pushed at a constant 1Mbps, would take 88 days... 4TB taking nearly an entire year.
4TB at a constant 100Mbps takes 3.5 days. It is a HUGE amount of data.
> recent emergence of high-definition video streamed to every home
Netflix claims about 3GB per hour of HD content streamed[1]. So if you were to stream 24 hours a day for an entire 30 day month, you'd barely peak over 2TB. That's 24 hours a day for 30 days straight - something nobody is doing.
A data cap of 3TB is simply not a problem for almost everybody. If you're running torrents, or hosting files, then ya - you might have issues. But then why should I pay comcast more every month to subsidize your non-normal usage?
Ah, I see. mbps v. MBps. Capitalization error!
Also, you're arguing against the past point which is fine because I messed up the capitalization (though the point still holds, because I wasn't doing anything abnormal; it was a two person household with a game console), but not against present use-cases:
4k 24fps video for Netflix is 7GB, and 1080p 24fps video is over 3GB/hr (HD is 720p). How many TVs are you aware of that are under 1080p? A house that has two people regularly watching Netflix in it on a modern data connection seems like it'd blow through that cap pretty quickly.
Why should Comcast be able to sell you a data connection you can't actually use? Caps are only a thing because Comcast oversells every connection.
It's not impossible, but it certainly isn't blowing through the cap quickly.
The caps are a thing because Comcast pays for ingress traffic into their network (they pay other providers from which the data comes from). At a point, you cost them more than you pay for. Which is where they charge you an overage.
Seems more than fair to me - I pay currently $49.99 a month for 150Mbps connection with a 3TB cap (I'm aware they offer different rates, speeds, and caps in different areas).
I do not want to pay more than $49.99 just because someone else in my area constantly uses 10TB each month - that person should pay more, not me.
Actually, in some cases, Comcast gets paid FOR it.
https://qz.com/256586/the-inside-story-of-how-netflix-came-t...
They started charging Netflix (or threatened to deprioritize or drop Netflix traffic) because Netflix traffic to Comcast customers starting making Comcast customers unprofitable.
Comcast does pay for ingress traffic. They are not a Tier 1 provider and do not peer with other Tier 1 providers - bits flowing in cost money. They either had to charge Comcast customers more per month, or get Netflix to subsidize the ingress traffic costs from their service.
This ultimately led to Netflix making the Open Connect boxes and offering them for free to ISP's as a way to mitigate the ingress costs. (this is why ISP provided video services don't have this problem - their traffic originates in-network and doesn't cost them anything additional to provide, fair or not)
Unless we're going to change how the 3 Tier provider system works and who gets to charge who for ingress traffic - I don't see this changing anytime soon. Unless you want to regulate our way into doubling your monthly Comcast bill... I sure don't.
what is should be forbidden would be to advertise an unlimited plan and then post-facto soft ban users that actually test the unlimited description, or deprioritize connection to expensive services (like YouTube, Netflix or torrents)