From Slashdot: Comcast goes after NAT users

[Patrick Miller]

I like your steak analogy. You pay for a steak that is the base rate. It you
want two steaks you can get two steaks. 

Charge me a flat rate for more than I will ever use unless I abuse the
system. I buy more minutes than I will normaly ever use. I never went with a
dialup that offered unlimited online time (200 hours for $19 was good). Sure
if I use 150 hours they probably lost some $$ but the law of averages says
they will make $$ and it stops the abusers--or allows the company to pay for
extra lines if they go over.

> can't use more than you pay for in this case.  Like a restraunt... is it
> fair for me to pay the same price for my steak as the guy at the next table
> if I only eat half and he eats it all?
> 
<snip>> 
> Lets journey back...  many years... well, not all that many.  Remember?
> Yes... you remember.... the $800 AOL bills.  The $500 Genie bills?  Because
> they charged by the hour for access.  Remember when 20 minutes a month for
> $50.00 was a great deal on a cellular phone plan? And 60 cents a minute over
> that was the going rate?
> 
> Companies have figured out that they make more money charging flat fee's.
> That way when you only use your cell phone 10 minutes they still get $30 or
> $40 instead of $6.  When you're like my father and only use your AOL account
> to check your e-mail twice a week they still hit you for the $21.95 a month.
> There are MANY more people out there under using services than using WHAT
> THEY ACTUALLY PAY FOR.

Yes... but you have got to stop the abusers while allowing people using nats
but not abusing the system to be happy. Why should I pay more if I am not
using more bandwith or abusing the service.