4 ms·

Net Neutrality just meant that Google got to shovel YouTube streams onto ISP networks without having to pay. Let's not pretend there were ever any noble intenti

Net Neutrality just meant that Google got to shovel YouTube streams onto ISP networks without having to pay. Let's not pretend there were ever any noble intentions behind it.

ZoomerCretin 5y ago
You think it’s okay for ISPs to double dip on charging their customers for access and then charging their customers’ most popular services (who are frequently competitors of the ISPs) for the privilege of accessing their customers? Why should any ISP think they can charge the source of my bits when I am already paying them for the bandwidth? https://www.theversed.com/2754/riot-games-seek-court-justice-after-internet-provider-deliberately-causes-in-game-lag/#.IfBauVI0Ad https://www.theversed.com/2754/riot-games-seek-court-justice... Net Neutrality is not just about “shoveling YouTube streams without having to pay.” In one case, an ISP was deliberately dropping packets for a popular online game (which, if you didn’t know, online games are known for requiring very little bandwidth), and extorting the game developer with the loss of ISP’s customers if they did not pay up. ISPs are monopoly-abusing extortionists. They deserve every bit of ire they receive.
- ysavir 5y ago
  I think the post you're responding to is saying that Google's incentives for supporting net neutrality were self-serving, not noble. They weren't saying that ISP behavior was fine.
  - jaywalk 5y ago
    Correct.
Hnrobert42 5y ago
What do you mean “without having to pay”? Google pays for its connection to the internet, right?
- jaywalk 5y ago
  No, in most cases they don't.
  - hyperionplays 5y ago
    This. Google has amazingly helpful peering bilats with most major ISP's globally, they don't have to pay for transit nearly as much as the rest of us. they were a staunch defender of net neutrality because it let them avoid millions of $$ in transit.
    - Hnrobert42 5y ago
      Why do Gooogle’s peers charge Google less money?
      - jaywalk 5y ago
        Peering is free by definition.
        sigjuice 5y ago
        how do I get free internet at home using this method ... i hate paying comcast every month
        jaywalk 5y ago
        Peering is a one-to-one relationship, not "Internet access" like you're thinking. If you peered with Comcast, for example, you'd only be able to reach Comcast customers over that connection. A more "Internet access" type of connection would be transit, which is definitely not free.
        kyboren 5y ago
        There is no exchange of value between the parties, but there is definitely a cost to peering. You need to physically get your data to the meet-me room, and that isn't free.

Net Neutrality just meant that Google got to shovel YouTube streams onto ISP networks without having to pay. Let's not pretend there were ever any noble intentions behind it.

ZoomerCretin 5y ago

You think it’s okay for ISPs to double dip on charging their customers for access and then charging their customers’ most popular services (who are frequently competitors of the ISPs) for the privilege of accessing their customers? Why should any ISP think they can charge the source of my bits when I am already paying them for the bandwidth? https://www.theversed.com/2754/riot-games-seek-court-justice-after-internet-provider-deliberately-causes-in-game-lag/#.IfBauVI0Ad https://www.theversed.com/2754/riot-games-seek-court-justice... Net Neutrality is not just about “shoveling YouTube streams without having to pay.” In one case, an ISP was deliberately dropping packets for a popular online game (which, if you didn’t know, online games are known for requiring very little bandwidth), and extorting the game developer with the loss of ISP’s customers if they did not pay up. ISPs are monopoly-abusing extortionists. They deserve every bit of ire they receive.

ysavir 5y ago
I think the post you're responding to is saying that Google's incentives for supporting net neutrality were self-serving, not noble. They weren't saying that ISP behavior was fine.
- jaywalk 5y ago
  Correct.

Hnrobert42 5y ago

What do you mean “without having to pay”? Google pays for its connection to the internet, right?

jaywalk 5y ago
No, in most cases they don't.
- hyperionplays 5y ago
  This. Google has amazingly helpful peering bilats with most major ISP's globally, they don't have to pay for transit nearly as much as the rest of us. they were a staunch defender of net neutrality because it let them avoid millions of $$ in transit.
  - Hnrobert42 5y ago
    Why do Gooogle’s peers charge Google less money?
    - jaywalk 5y ago
      Peering is free by definition.
      - sigjuice 5y ago
        how do I get free internet at home using this method ... i hate paying comcast every month
        jaywalk 5y ago
        Peering is a one-to-one relationship, not "Internet access" like you're thinking. If you peered with Comcast, for example, you'd only be able to reach Comcast customers over that connection. A more "Internet access" type of connection would be transit, which is definitely not free.
      - kyboren 5y ago
        There is no exchange of value between the parties, but there is definitely a cost to peering. You need to physically get your data to the meet-me room, and that isn't free.