15 ms·

"Because in order to sell you onto these bullshit packages they will end up making your regular connection hellish. So you have an issue connecting to netflix..

"Because in order to sell you onto these bullshit packages they will end up making your regular connection hellish. So you have an issue connecting to netflix... oh sir for just $14.99/mo you can get our Netflix QoS package" No. A 'Netflix QoS package' is not a QoS package. That's against Net Neutrality. A 'Video Streaming' package that offers high quality video streaming with low latency, but doesn't care about things like picking up dropped packets - and doesn't discriminate between content sources - this would be 'net neutral'. "Because in order to sell you onto these bullshit packages they will end up making your regular connection hellish" This is a completely separate issue and has nothing to do with NN really. They can (and probably do) this already today with their regular package offers. Let's not confuse general ISP stupidity with actual NN.

throwaway5752 8y ago
"That's against Net Neutrality" Net Neutrality doesn't exist any more. Did you not read the article? This isn't hypothetical, it was allowed to expire as of today. It's no longer the law, ISPs can legally do whatever they want now, including a "Netflix QoS package". I am admittedly not a lawyer, but I'm reasonably well informed on the topic and completely open to being corrected if you know better.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  Network Neutrality is a concept, not a law. Yes, the US law requiring a certain kind of Network Neutrality did expire. The point is: service providers charging for differentiated QoS (such as different packages for latency) is well within the concept of Network Neutrality. What is 'out of bounds' for NN is charing for customers based on the content of those packages. So: > A low latency service (designed for gaming in mind), is NN > A low-latency service 'for games only' - is not NN > If the ISP charges you money to access 'Steam' games, but not for others - that is not NN.

throwaway5752 8y ago

"That's against Net Neutrality" Net Neutrality doesn't exist any more. Did you not read the article? This isn't hypothetical, it was allowed to expire as of today. It's no longer the law, ISPs can legally do whatever they want now, including a "Netflix QoS package". I am admittedly not a lawyer, but I'm reasonably well informed on the topic and completely open to being corrected if you know better.

sonnyblarney 8y ago
Network Neutrality is a concept, not a law. Yes, the US law requiring a certain kind of Network Neutrality did expire. The point is: service providers charging for differentiated QoS (such as different packages for latency) is well within the concept of Network Neutrality. What is 'out of bounds' for NN is charing for customers based on the content of those packages. So: > A low latency service (designed for gaming in mind), is NN > A low-latency service 'for games only' - is not NN > If the ISP charges you money to access 'Steam' games, but not for others - that is not NN.