3 ms·

Wouldn't getting rid of net neutrality actually be good for startups and smaller companies? People are effectively subsidizing the internet giants right now, if

Wouldn't getting rid of net neutrality actually be good for startups and smaller companies? People are effectively subsidizing the internet giants right now, if telecoms charged extra for them people would move on to different services? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's odd to see people banding together to defend Google, Amazon, Netflix, etc. Although the companies on the other side are obviously scum as well.

grive 9y ago
How do you start a content company when competing against the subsidiaries of the tube owners then? They essentially have prime access to their internal market, and you will have to pay upfront to have a public. Why would they demand only the giants to pay? They have zero interest fostering competition against their own products.
HillaryBriss 9y ago
good point. are google's search results neutral?
rpedroso 9y ago
Suppose that we eliminate net neutrality. Further suppose that, in a few years, I start a video streaming service called "Notflix". Because ISPs are no longer required to be dumb pipes, they've started charging their customers a premium for access to video content. This is bad for Netflix, of course, because it cuts into their subscriber base. They crunch some numbers and come up with an amount they're willing to pay the ISPs to exclude their subscribers from this segmented pricing scheme. The ISPs accept this mutually beneficial deal, and everyone's happy, right? What about Notflix, though? We don't have the capital that Netflix has to pay into this protection racket, so our subscribers must choose between paying the ISP video premium + our subscription fee, or Netflix's subscription fee. That's an uphill battle and straightforwardly anti-competitive, but is also the precisely the promise of a world without net neutrality. I also disagree with your assessment that anybody is subsidizing internet giants. All those players pay for the bandwidth they consume to dump their data into the network. The end-user pays for the other end of the connection. Everything is being paid for, proportionally to the usage. The last-mile ISPs simply want to double-dip. Comcast thinks Netflix should pay both Level 3 AND Comcast for using the pipes, which fundamentally undermines the architecture of the internet.
- cmahler7 9y ago
  >I also disagree with your assessment that anybody is subsidizing internet giants. All those players pay for the bandwidth they consume to dump their data into the network. The end-user pays for the other end of the connection. Everything is being paid for, proportionally to the usage. I know very little about the situation, hence the naive question, that statement was based off all the websites like reddit putting up fake pay walls to show what things would be like without net neutrality.
jonathanstrange 9y ago
> Wouldn't getting rid of net neutrality actually be good for startups and smaller companies? How so? Only very large companies are able to pay for getting high enough bandwidth and speed and, more importantly, also negotiate the corresponding deals with the few networks (who already have effective monopolies in many areas). Smaller startups can hardly compete against them when their services are too slow. I can see no reasonable story according to which giving up neutrality would be beneficial to smaller companies. The best thing a small startup can do is to bundle up with one of a few large corporations, and the result are more quasi-monopolies and cartels, of course.
mreome 9y ago
How often do you see an old TV station replaced by a new one with better offerings? How often with websites? A Non-neutral internet has the potential to make the current big-players on the internet as locked-in as the TV networks. New offerings would not be able to afford to pay for the fast-lanes used by the established companies, and would thus not be able to compete with them. Supporting net-neutrality is not defending Google, Amazon, Netflix, it's defending the sites that might some day replace them.
s73ver 9y ago
1. I care more about my ability to access the internet than any startup's ability to do business. 2. If NN is thrown out, and pay to play becomes the name of the game, who do you think is going to be able to pay? Google, Amazon, Netflix, etc, or some unnamed startup?

grive 9y ago

How do you start a content company when competing against the subsidiaries of the tube owners then? They essentially have prime access to their internal market, and you will have to pay upfront to have a public. Why would they demand only the giants to pay? They have zero interest fostering competition against their own products.

HillaryBriss 9y ago

good point. are google's search results neutral?

rpedroso 9y ago

Suppose that we eliminate net neutrality. Further suppose that, in a few years, I start a video streaming service called "Notflix". Because ISPs are no longer required to be dumb pipes, they've started charging their customers a premium for access to video content. This is bad for Netflix, of course, because it cuts into their subscriber base. They crunch some numbers and come up with an amount they're willing to pay the ISPs to exclude their subscribers from this segmented pricing scheme. The ISPs accept this mutually beneficial deal, and everyone's happy, right? What about Notflix, though? We don't have the capital that Netflix has to pay into this protection racket, so our subscribers must choose between paying the ISP video premium + our subscription fee, or Netflix's subscription fee. That's an uphill battle and straightforwardly anti-competitive, but is also the precisely the promise of a world without net neutrality. I also disagree with your assessment that anybody is subsidizing internet giants. All those players pay for the bandwidth they consume to dump their data into the network. The end-user pays for the other end of the connection. Everything is being paid for, proportionally to the usage. The last-mile ISPs simply want to double-dip. Comcast thinks Netflix should pay both Level 3 AND Comcast for using the pipes, which fundamentally undermines the architecture of the internet.

cmahler7 9y ago
>I also disagree with your assessment that anybody is subsidizing internet giants. All those players pay for the bandwidth they consume to dump their data into the network. The end-user pays for the other end of the connection. Everything is being paid for, proportionally to the usage. I know very little about the situation, hence the naive question, that statement was based off all the websites like reddit putting up fake pay walls to show what things would be like without net neutrality.

jonathanstrange 9y ago

> Wouldn't getting rid of net neutrality actually be good for startups and smaller companies? How so? Only very large companies are able to pay for getting high enough bandwidth and speed and, more importantly, also negotiate the corresponding deals with the few networks (who already have effective monopolies in many areas). Smaller startups can hardly compete against them when their services are too slow. I can see no reasonable story according to which giving up neutrality would be beneficial to smaller companies. The best thing a small startup can do is to bundle up with one of a few large corporations, and the result are more quasi-monopolies and cartels, of course.

mreome 9y ago

How often do you see an old TV station replaced by a new one with better offerings? How often with websites? A Non-neutral internet has the potential to make the current big-players on the internet as locked-in as the TV networks. New offerings would not be able to afford to pay for the fast-lanes used by the established companies, and would thus not be able to compete with them. Supporting net-neutrality is not defending Google, Amazon, Netflix, it's defending the sites that might some day replace them.

s73ver 9y ago

1. I care more about my ability to access the internet than any startup's ability to do business. 2. If NN is thrown out, and pay to play becomes the name of the game, who do you think is going to be able to pay? Google, Amazon, Netflix, etc, or some unnamed startup?