3 ms·

Please explain how a system that saves the average user a ton of bandwidth quota, reduces network congestion, and is trivial to opt out of, is "actually screwin

by stonogo 10y ago

Please explain how a system that saves the average user a ton of bandwidth quota, reduces network congestion, and is trivial to opt out of, is "actually screwing people over". I'm very pleased with their Netflix policy, because it means I don't have to bother with shitty hotel DSL for Netflix while I'm traveling.

slg 10y ago
For most people it is good. That is the problem. The first challengers to Net Neutrality were always going to be deals like this that benefit people. Once a precedent is well established we will start seeing the industry making consumer unfriendly changes like moving Facebook or Netflix access to a higher cost plan. This is the drug dealers giving us our first hit for free.
mmanfrin 10y ago
Because those services which TMobile has greenlit for free bandwidth now have a large competitive advantage over anyone else. Why would a user pay for, for instance, Seeso (a content streaming service) when they'd have to then pay even more for the data to stream it when they could just keep Netflix. It's nice getting the free data, but this is shoehorning in the 'nice' parts of breaking net neutrality before the other shoe drops.
- mahyarm 10y ago
  If the carrier keeps it a free for all service to sign up as a general congestion incentive, like utility rebates to use more energy efficient light bulbs, then I can see it as a net positive.
  - mmanfrin 10y ago
    Except that it's the opposite of a congestion incentive... it's unmetering so people can use high-bandwidth using services. And if you're offering that any service can sign up to not be metered, then why even meter bandwidth at all?
- roywiggins 10y ago
  As long as any video provider can sign up to the program without paying protection money (which, so far as I know, right now they can) I don't see the problem. Sure, it gives Netflix an advantage, but only over providers that haven't bothered to sign up to the scheme for some reason.

by stonogo 10y ago

slg 10y ago

For most people it is good. That is the problem. The first challengers to Net Neutrality were always going to be deals like this that benefit people. Once a precedent is well established we will start seeing the industry making consumer unfriendly changes like moving Facebook or Netflix access to a higher cost plan. This is the drug dealers giving us our first hit for free.

mmanfrin 10y ago

Because those services which TMobile has greenlit for free bandwidth now have a large competitive advantage over anyone else. Why would a user pay for, for instance, Seeso (a content streaming service) when they'd have to then pay even more for the data to stream it when they could just keep Netflix. It's nice getting the free data, but this is shoehorning in the 'nice' parts of breaking net neutrality before the other shoe drops.

mahyarm 10y ago
If the carrier keeps it a free for all service to sign up as a general congestion incentive, like utility rebates to use more energy efficient light bulbs, then I can see it as a net positive.
- mmanfrin 10y ago
  Except that it's the opposite of a congestion incentive... it's unmetering so people can use high-bandwidth using services. And if you're offering that any service can sign up to not be metered, then why even meter bandwidth at all?
roywiggins 10y ago
As long as any video provider can sign up to the program without paying protection money (which, so far as I know, right now they can) I don't see the problem. Sure, it gives Netflix an advantage, but only over providers that haven't bothered to sign up to the scheme for some reason.