4 ms·
> And to expand: by your logic, it would be ok then for Chrome to block all links to Firefox? No, that wouldn't be OK. But not everything that is not OK is a n
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
> And to expand: by your logic, it would be ok then for Chrome to block all links to Firefox?
No, that wouldn't be OK. But not everything that is not OK is a network neutrality violation.
- ucaetano 9y ago> No, that wouldn't be OK. But not everything that is not OK is a network neutrality violation. If you consider browsers an integral part of the internet infrastructure, it is. If not, it isn't. Happy to discuss naming, but it will mostly be useless. But glad that you agree that Firefox preemptively delaying those sites is not OK.
- brokensegue 9y ago>But glad that you agree that Firefox preemptively delaying those sites is not OK. that kind of snarky comment is not helpful
- zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago> If you consider browsers an integral part of the internet infrastructure, it is. If not, it isn't. No, it simply doesn't have anything to do with whether it is internet infrastructure. Prioritizing stuff according to the user's wishes/under the user's control without price discrimination is not a neutrality violation, even when network operators do it. > But glad that you agree that Firefox preemptively delaying those sites is not OK. Idiot.