Do you think the internet of the future

[Foo]

but i still NEVER see ads...

So you can use an ad blocker, great, however there are still file planet type sites that you need to click 3 times just to get to the content. WHy? Because they increase ad views, and not everyone has the savvy to use an ad blocker, ppl who do are definitly in the minority of net users. Questions?

and they increase ad views why? because bandwidth is not free.

One of the ironies of the situation is that although in the current situation you're dead right - in the end bandwidth is *practically* free.

[jester!]

Have to admit I am completely ignorant to the money side of running a site, but if bandwidth is so cheap then why is it so common to see sites complaining about costs? Is it not the bandwidth but the costs of keeping the server at a storage facility, maintained and such?

[+JuggerNaut+]

you pay a monthly fee to you isp = not practically free.

servers pay quite a bit of money for the bandwidth they're dishing out per month = not practically free.

now the AMOUNT of bandwidth per dollar for a typical torrent junkie could be considered "practically free" because of the sheer amount of warez that's being used certainly dwarfs any monthly dues they owe their isp.

[Foo]

That's kinda what I meant.

mainly my point was that there's no true cost incurred per bit transferred. Beyond the static costs - initial cost of the equipment, constant degredation costs of the equipment, constant technician cost - there's no monetary impact if 1Mb of data is transferred or 1 million Gb.

Hence there's no real cost to bandwidth. The sliding scales attributed to bandwidth costs are the product of underselling. Which is of course entirely sensible and couldn't in practice be any other way.

[+JuggerNaut+]

oh

[jester!]

Ah.

[seremtan]

the internet of the future will allow doombrain to check his panty drawer wirelessly on the move