3 ms·
This was not about charging differently based on how much people have. It was about charging differently based on WHAT you are using. So, if I have much money
by rtdp 11y ago
This was not about charging differently based on how much people have.
It was about charging differently based on WHAT you are using.
So, if I have much money, I can have my service freely for everyone, while this other startup, unless pays to internet providers, will be available over the paid internet.
- retube 11y ago> It was about charging differently based on WHAT you are using. Sure - but what you use, and from where, is highly correlated with wealth
- Manishearth 11y ago> Sure - but what you use, and from where, is highly correlated with wealth Do you have an example of a case where sites rich people use were being priced higher? It's not enough to say "what you use is correlated with wealth" to support "this effectively this stops "richer" people being charged more", you need to show where websites being used by rich people were being charged for. This does stop Facebook from giving Free Facebook (+ other services), agreed. Which is a service used by basically everyone.