4 ms·

That example shows zero rating, not "pay $5 to access certain websites", as most people assume once it circulates through the NN debate. Still problematic, but

by r3bl 9y ago

That example shows zero rating, not "pay $5 to access certain websites", as most people assume once it circulates through the NN debate. Still problematic, but not as quite as those who share it make it seem. "Pay $5 to use social media" and "pay $5 to use your data plan for anything you want and have additional data specifically for social media" is not the same.

jimktrains2 9y ago
It's still terrible. Just slightly less terrible for consumers, but perhaps even moreso for small businesses.
AlexandrB 9y ago
> Still problematic, but not as quite as those who share it make it seem. It's anticompetitive. What if I made my own social media network tomorrow? Could someone get additional data for it at discounted rates? No. It creates another barrier to competing with the incumbents.
crankylinuxuser 9y ago
Nope. That's a bad argument - they're mostly the same, and in some ways zero rating is much worse. At my trailer, I get "Water Service". I don't get: "Drinking water service" "Dishwashing water service" "Washing machine service" "Bath/shower service" "Pool/jacuzzi service" "Toilet water service" And upcharging/downcharging per "type" of water isn't done, at least on residential. Now, there may be rates of peak times where water/volume is more expensive for everyone. But that's not watching what devices the water goes to. And, Zero rating would be like saying "Pay X/month extra and Bath/Shower water is counted as zero". Uh, no. Water's water. Like like how data's data. Now, about why Zero Rating is worse - you start up a fledgling business that does something novel with a Zero Rated service. Well guess what? All those entrenched players with Zero Rating get an "In", and your new service is pretty much screwed until you can figure out how to get on that list. Zero rating is yet another barrier preventing new players on the Internet.
- bsherrill 9y ago
  It's not done yet. It is coming in the near future.

by r3bl 9y ago

jimktrains2 9y ago

It's still terrible. Just slightly less terrible for consumers, but perhaps even moreso for small businesses.

AlexandrB 9y ago

> Still problematic, but not as quite as those who share it make it seem. It's anticompetitive. What if I made my own social media network tomorrow? Could someone get additional data for it at discounted rates? No. It creates another barrier to competing with the incumbents.

crankylinuxuser 9y ago

Nope. That's a bad argument - they're mostly the same, and in some ways zero rating is much worse. At my trailer, I get "Water Service". I don't get: "Drinking water service" "Dishwashing water service" "Washing machine service" "Bath/shower service" "Pool/jacuzzi service" "Toilet water service" And upcharging/downcharging per "type" of water isn't done, at least on residential. Now, there may be rates of peak times where water/volume is more expensive for everyone. But that's not watching what devices the water goes to. And, Zero rating would be like saying "Pay X/month extra and Bath/Shower water is counted as zero". Uh, no. Water's water. Like like how data's data. Now, about why Zero Rating is worse - you start up a fledgling business that does something novel with a Zero Rated service. Well guess what? All those entrenched players with Zero Rating get an "In", and your new service is pretty much screwed until you can figure out how to get on that list. Zero rating is yet another barrier preventing new players on the Internet.

bsherrill 9y ago
It's not done yet. It is coming in the near future.