5 ms·
I think that's a bad analogy. I'm in support of net neutrality but your analogy just made me want to support different pricing for water. Water is a finite, p
by foodstances 10y ago
I think that's a bad analogy. I'm in support of net neutrality but your analogy just made me want to support different pricing for water.
Water is a finite, possibly scarce resource, and there are shortages in places in the US. If I lived in one of those places, I would sure as hell want some asshole filling his pool during a shortage to pay more than the rest of us pay for basic drinking water. Similarly, I would want companies that bottle that water up and sell it at a premium to pay more than everyone else.
Municipalities already limit outdoor water usage for exactly this reason. You can drink all the water you want but you can only use it outside to water your grass or fill your pool on odd or even days. Your analogy is saying that shouldn't be allowed, because internet.
- creeble 10y agoPerhaps electricity might be a better analogy?
- amelius 10y agoNope, it's also a scarce resource. And similarly to water, excessive use is (usually still) bad for the planet.
- creeble 10y agoBut internet connectivity is somehow inherently limitless and deliverable for free?
- mjevans 10y agoInternet connectivity is all about maximum capacity. Everything past that is just sunk costs. It doesn't cost anything more to use it at maximum capacity than it does to just leave it on standby. (The end points MIGHT use a TINY bit more power, but we're talking on the order of cents per month for terrabytes/month of traffic; it's a rounding error.)
- tunap 10y agoThe electrical analogy is more closely comparable, but I've found water is a simpler concept for most to comprehend.
- shuntress 10y agoBandwidth is also limited.
- Spivak 10y agoWhich is why you pay for 'speed' which is basically a proxy for bandwidth.