3 ms·
I think the intention is something like: A service which is free from the creator's perspective (YouTube / CarPlay) will now carry a new fee imposed by the com
by gervase 9y ago
I think the intention is something like:
A service which is free from the creator's perspective (YouTube / CarPlay) will now carry a new fee imposed by the company which delivers the service (ISP / BMW) despite the intention of the creator.
- muro 9y ago1. It carries a cost before, just the way it's charged had changed 2. It's not free
- jachee 9y ago1. It shouldn't. 2. Other Manufacturers provide it for free. To the consumer, it is as if Verizon were to start charging extra annual fees to access YouTube content while Comcast, AT&T and every other ISP don't.
- EpicEng 9y agoOh, "other manufacturers" you say? So you mean, the market is competitive and I have a choice? That, among the other reasons listed, is why it's nothing like net neutrality. Also, your #1 is an opinion.