> A fixed price means that light users subsidize heavy users.
That is an orthogonal problem that we already have and it has nothing to do with my idea. You can solve it individually by choosing a different pricing model, just as we already do. The point is not to charge for each tiny piece but in bulk, and to distribute the money according to actual usage. The pricing is something entirely different, I have nothing at all to say about it. The $199 was an example.
The monitoring argument is valid, but it is no different from what we already have, nor do I see the difficulty - just add an opt-out and let individuals choose to go with the "pay for each item separately" model. No big deal, choice is good. I have no desire to establish "the one system (to replace them all)". Competition between ideas and systems is IMHO essential, I would not want a system that is imposed on everyone, but one that can be chosen.
> Many people I know are struggle to pay for Internet access;
That too is no different from the problems we already have on all levels of society and also worldwide, and the same solutions (or just not solving it, as we often do) apply. The concept as I laid it out has no "social" component, only one that increases commerce. Not because I don't care about social, but that's just something my idea can't tackle.
I did read; if I misunderstood, I apologize, but I still don't see how my objection is invalid.
You talked about having "ONE big service subscription, let's say $199 annually" which gave full access. How can such a fixed-price bundle not lead to light users subsidizing heavy users?
The monitoring argument is valid, but it is no different from what we already have, nor do I see the difficulty - just add an opt-out and let individuals choose to go with the "pay for each item separately" model. No big deal, choice is good. I have no desire to establish "the one system (to replace them all)". Competition between ideas and systems is IMHO essential, I would not want a system that is imposed on everyone, but one that can be chosen.
That too is no different from the problems we already have on all levels of society and also worldwide, and the same solutions (or just not solving it, as we often do) apply. The concept as I laid it out has no "social" component, only one that increases commerce. Not because I don't care about social, but that's just something my idea can't tackle.