<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The false dichotomy of net neutrality, and the Tariff Rebate Passthrough solution</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.monashreport.com/2006/06/19/net-neutrality-tariff-rebate-passthrough/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.monashreport.com/2006/06/19/net-neutrality-tariff-rebate-passthrough/</link>
	<description>Technology ... politics ... marketing ... strategy ... life</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 09:52:33 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: The Monash Report&#187;Blog Archive &#187; How Tariff Rebate Passthrough would work</title>
		<link>http://www.monashreport.com/2006/06/19/net-neutrality-tariff-rebate-passthrough/#comment-960</link>
		<dc:creator>The Monash Report&#187;Blog Archive &#187; How Tariff Rebate Passthrough would work</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jun 2006 04:50:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.monashreport.com/2006/06/19/85/#comment-960</guid>
		<description>[...] Dave Siegel posted a challenge to my Tariff Rebate Passthrough net neutrality proposal, claiming that technical implementation would be unduly burdensome, and also touching on the fact that consumers generally prefer flat-rate to metered pricing. I think the best response would be to spell out, in a little more detail, how it would work. Along the way, I think I can answer Dave&#8217;s (and anybody else&#8217;s) concerns. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Dave Siegel posted a challenge to my Tariff Rebate Passthrough net neutrality proposal, claiming that technical implementation would be unduly burdensome, and also touching on the fact that consumers generally prefer flat-rate to metered pricing. I think the best response would be to spell out, in a little more detail, how it would work. Along the way, I think I can answer Dave&#8217;s (and anybody else&#8217;s) concerns. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: monash</title>
		<link>http://www.monashreport.com/2006/06/19/net-neutrality-tariff-rebate-passthrough/#comment-959</link>
		<dc:creator>monash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jun 2006 01:22:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.monashreport.com/2006/06/19/85/#comment-959</guid>
		<description>OK.  This is weird.  I could have sworn I saw another comment here, and now it&#039;s gone.  Something about high pricing for QOS, which doesn&#039;t make a lot of sense to me unless I can read the whole line of reasoning.

Damn.

CAM

EDIT:  Double damn.  I deleted the post by error, clearing spam comments.  And the email address wasn&#039;t accurate, or in any case caused a bounce.  Hopefully, my second try at reaching the poster will work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK.  This is weird.  I could have sworn I saw another comment here, and now it&#8217;s gone.  Something about high pricing for QOS, which doesn&#8217;t make a lot of sense to me unless I can read the whole line of reasoning.</p>
<p>Damn.</p>
<p>CAM</p>
<p>EDIT:  Double damn.  I deleted the post by error, clearing spam comments.  And the email address wasn&#8217;t accurate, or in any case caused a bounce.  Hopefully, my second try at reaching the poster will work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: monash</title>
		<link>http://www.monashreport.com/2006/06/19/net-neutrality-tariff-rebate-passthrough/#comment-958</link>
		<dc:creator>monash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jun 2006 01:20:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.monashreport.com/2006/06/19/85/#comment-958</guid>
		<description>Dave,

I don&#039;t see why billing should be NEARLY such a burden.  The rebate is a reduction in charges on your bill, noted as a line item that you don&#039;t even have to drill down to if you don&#039;t (this assumes you check your bill online).

The problem of metered vs. flat-rate pricing that you also raise is, unfortunately, a more serious one.  Consumers love their flat-rate pricing, for all sorts of reasons, many of which are good.  I&#039;ll need to think on that.

Thanks,

CAM</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dave,</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t see why billing should be NEARLY such a burden.  The rebate is a reduction in charges on your bill, noted as a line item that you don&#8217;t even have to drill down to if you don&#8217;t (this assumes you check your bill online).</p>
<p>The problem of metered vs. flat-rate pricing that you also raise is, unfortunately, a more serious one.  Consumers love their flat-rate pricing, for all sorts of reasons, many of which are good.  I&#8217;ll need to think on that.</p>
<p>Thanks,</p>
<p>CAM</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Siegel</title>
		<link>http://www.monashreport.com/2006/06/19/net-neutrality-tariff-rebate-passthrough/#comment-874</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Siegel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:57:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.monashreport.com/2006/06/19/85/#comment-874</guid>
		<description>The main problem with your proposal, as I see it, is that it is too hard to understand or predict what the costs will be, both for the consumer as well as the content provider.

Secondary problems are: Consumer will revolt at the idea of getting a huge bill, and then having to submit enormous amounts of paperwork, wait for their rebate checks to come in the mail, delayed payments may result in them not being able to pay their bill, resulting in disconnection...ick.

Additionally, the administration overhead in administrating the billing by the broadband provider, the verification of valid rebate requests by the content providers and processing of outgoing payments may be so staggering that it adds substantial cost to the whoel affair, perhaps doubling or tripling the price of that content.

The only people this solution satisfies are the ones that provide billing software and solutions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The main problem with your proposal, as I see it, is that it is too hard to understand or predict what the costs will be, both for the consumer as well as the content provider.</p>
<p>Secondary problems are: Consumer will revolt at the idea of getting a huge bill, and then having to submit enormous amounts of paperwork, wait for their rebate checks to come in the mail, delayed payments may result in them not being able to pay their bill, resulting in disconnection&#8230;ick.</p>
<p>Additionally, the administration overhead in administrating the billing by the broadband provider, the verification of valid rebate requests by the content providers and processing of outgoing payments may be so staggering that it adds substantial cost to the whoel affair, perhaps doubling or tripling the price of that content.</p>
<p>The only people this solution satisfies are the ones that provide billing software and solutions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Monash Report&#187;Blog Archive &#187; Why I feel qualified to pontificate about public policy</title>
		<link>http://www.monashreport.com/2006/06/19/net-neutrality-tariff-rebate-passthrough/#comment-832</link>
		<dc:creator>The Monash Report&#187;Blog Archive &#187; Why I feel qualified to pontificate about public policy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jun 2006 17:27:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.monashreport.com/2006/06/19/85/#comment-832</guid>
		<description>[...] Maybe I should explain why I feel motivated and qualified to hold forth at such length about public policy issues such as net neutrality, free-world privacy, authoritarian censorship, economic development, and so on. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Maybe I should explain why I feel motivated and qualified to hold forth at such length about public policy issues such as net neutrality, free-world privacy, authoritarian censorship, economic development, and so on. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Monash Report&#187;Blog Archive &#187; Great debate on net neutrality</title>
		<link>http://www.monashreport.com/2006/06/19/net-neutrality-tariff-rebate-passthrough/#comment-821</link>
		<dc:creator>The Monash Report&#187;Blog Archive &#187; Great debate on net neutrality</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:10:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.monashreport.com/2006/06/19/85/#comment-821</guid>
		<description>[...] The Save the Internet folks report on a wonderful net neutrality debate. And what they have to say is totally compatible with my Tariff Rebate Passthrough proposal. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The Save the Internet folks report on a wonderful net neutrality debate. And what they have to say is totally compatible with my Tariff Rebate Passthrough proposal. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
