2 ms·
I don't use Netflix (true), but if almost everybody else does (also true) then I and up paying more to subsidize them. Also there's only one reasonable option
by lupusreal 2y ago
I don't use Netflix (true), but if almost everybody else does (also true) then I and up paying more to subsidize them.
Also there's only one reasonable option for internet in my neighborhood. Starlink or cellular would cost even more and for what? I'd still be subsidizing Netflix use.
Splitting up Netflix doesn't help; if everybody falls asleep watching a plethora of streaming services instead of one, they're still wasting bandwidth. Similarly, splitting up ISPs doesn't solve the problem either. The real solution would be to charge everybody for what they actually use. Metered data, with the price fluctuating with demand. The way the electrical system works.
- Wytwwww 2y ago> The way the electrical system works. But that's hardly comparable? Each kWh costs some amount of energy to generate. Do you think it costs an ISP meaningfully more to run a 10 Gbps at 90% than 70%?