3 ms·
But the person who makes the decision as to what ends up in the pipe (i.e. the end user, Netflix doesn't just spam people's routers) is the one who is already p
by johncolanduoni 9y ago
But the person who makes the decision as to what ends up in the pipe (i.e. the end user, Netflix doesn't just spam people's routers) is the one who is already paying. Netflix isn't crowding anyone out (especially if they have a server within the ISP's perimeter), every bit of that bandwidth is requested by a user. Users crowding each other out is already handled by prioritizing based on how much they pay.
Mass of food is a false equivalence; cost of food per kg varies widely based on food, but cost of transmission of bulk traffic (the only kind ISPs are proposing to charge the entity on the other side of the connection for) is largely identical to the ISP. The cost may vary depending on where it comes from (network wise, not precisely geographically), but ISPs are already able to deal with that by having different sized links to other ISPs.
- fiatjaf 9y agoRight. After reading yours and basically all other replies to my comment I understand that NN isn't supposed to prevent ISPs from limiting individual users' bandwidth or charging more per heavy usage. In those terms I think I can support NN and take back my comments.
- sverhagen 9y agoYou're convinced! Maybe your name is an acronym-alias for Ajit and something, and we're all now in the clear :)
- PhasmaFelis 9y agoThanks for this. It's good when people can admit they've changed their minds.