Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!mcnc!taco!ccvr1!hes
From: hes@ccvr1.ncsu.edu (Henry E. Schaffer)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Big Brother charging for modem use?
Message-ID: <1991Mar4.021434.761@ncsu.edu>
Date: 4 Mar 91 02:14:34 GMT
References: <7X9kw3w163w@bluemoon.uucp> <1991Mar2.023716.13851@csn.org>
Sender: news@ncsu.edu (USENET News System)
Reply-To: hes@ccvr1.ncsu.edu (Henry E. Schaffer)
Organization: NCSU Computing Center
Lines: 54

In article <1991Mar2.023716.13851@csn.org> wouk@alumni.colorado.edu (Arthur Wouk) writes:
> ...
>i would like to comment on this matter based on my knowledge gained
>from being in a company that was bought out by a telephone company
>(GTE) over 30 years ago.  (i didn't stay around toolong after thast.)
>
>the principle on which telephone service works is that of
>'concentration'. it is too expensive to run a single line from each
                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  Except that this is what is very often done in urban and suburban
areas.  While this is just a single part of the telephone system,
the point is important - and is at the root of my disagreement with
this argument.

>terminal point ((telephone, ...)  to the switching center and hence pn
>th the network. instead, local concentrators exist to serve a given
>number of phones (say 10) on the basis that not more than one of them
>will need service at any one time. actually this is an obvious
>oversimplification, but it makes the point. these concentrators again
>may be concentrated one or more times before reaching the switching
>station. at the switching station you enter the world of trunk lines
>with much capacity,  but again based on a predicted usage level.
>
>the point of this is, the physical plant is based on a specific
>predicted utilization level, based on a well established pattern of
>utilization by different types of users: home, business, etc.
> ...

  However, this is only part of the story and it is a major distortion
to consider it as the whole story.  Some parts of my telephone service
are dedicated to my phone alone.  My local loop (which in my case goes
to my central office) is used only by me and sits there vacant when I
don't use it. Similarly such services as monthly billing and listing
services are constant cost regardless of my phone usage.  The
telephone switch in my central office may or may not be cost sensitive
to my use.  (If it is non-blocking then costs don't depend on how much
I use my phone.  If it is blocking, then there may have to be a *very*
small equipment increment if I use my phone very much.)  The trunks from 
my central office to others in my local calling area do have their
size dependant on how much I use them, but for long distance trunks I
am already paying dependant on how much I use them.

  Therefore I claim that major portions of the cost of rendering me
phone service do not change because of my usage pattern, and that other
portions increase very slowly with my increased usage.  If I am 
correct, then much of the "we consider you a business and therefore
you must pay much higher rates" stuff is simply a way for the phone co.
to collect extra money (and to provide a public relations rationale so
that the general public will swallow this rationale.)

  If there really was an increased cost, wouldn't the phone companies
talk about it?

--henry schaffer  n c state univ