5 ms·
> closing the books on consumer protections for a generation. That sounds serious, and for a generation. I have not understood the 'consumer protections' argu
by landemva 3y ago
> closing the books on consumer protections for a generation.
That sounds serious, and for a generation.
I have not understood the 'consumer protections' argument. If an ISP allows traffic requests from a residence, then what is the problem? I haven't noticed how I may have been harmed by not having NN.
- rsingel 3y agoYou get to do that because of net neutrality. The FCC in 2005 made it clear that ISPs couldn't block online services (Madison River blocking VoIP). In 2008, the FCC stopped Comcast from blocking Bittorent, establishing precedent that network management should be application agnostic. Then on 2015 the FCC said it had authority over interconnection, which stopped AT&T, Comcast and Verizon from throttling Netflix, League of Legends and Cogent at the point of interconnection (shaking them down for payment). That meant 10s of millions of Americans could actually play games and watch videos. So yes if you get to do what you want to do online, that's because of 20 years of net neutrality oversight
- landemva 3y agoYou mixed in throttling. Bandwidth, like fluid pipelines, have fixed capacity. The pipeline providers can not provide greater bandwidth without somebody paying. If they can't charge Netflix for high usage, the costs are shifted to consumers. In your example with Netflix bandwidth, I end up paying for Netflix's excess bandwidth usage. Your NN forces higher consumer costs and greater profits to Netflix owners.