4 ms·

This is not net neutrality, all network traffic is not treated equally. Ofcom seems to have invented their own definition of net neutrality and placed it on th

This is not net neutrality, all network traffic is not treated equally. Ofcom seems to have invented their own definition of net neutrality and placed it on that website, but calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg. This is tiered access.

foldr 6mo ago
It doesn't meet a perfect theoretical definition of net neutrality, but it's a set of defined legal limits on the extent to which providers can treat different kinds of traffic differently.
- daedrdev 6mo ago
  Ok but the main limit people care about is music and video streaming being treated differently
  - foldr 6mo ago
    What would be the model of a country with stronger net neutrality laws? I think EU regulations are now a touch stronger than UK regulations due to post-Brexit divergence, but by world standards, the UK has strong net neutrality protections.
- hamdingers 6mo ago
  Net neutrality is not theoretical, it is literally the default setting. Any deviation from that default requires special effort be taken to identify network traffic and treat it differently, and as soon as you have made that effort you cannot truthfully claim to have net neutrality. The UK does not prohibit net neutrality but it does not require it either (according to the comment I replied to which I have not verified).
  - foldr 6mo ago
    I guess to me this seems a bit like saying that free markets are the default setting. We’re not in some kind of perfect state of nature. We’re in a complex interconnected society where virtually everything of any importance is regulated to some extent. What you’re saying seems like saying “as soon as you impose one regulation you no longer have a free market”.
    - hamdingers 6mo ago
      This non sequitur strains my ability to assume good faith on your part. We're not talking about markets, we're talking about a utility. Does your water company bill you differently depending on what you use the water for? Your gas company? Electric? This is not a complicated concept to understand, please make an effort.
      - foldr 6mo ago
        It’s just an analogy. I can understand if you don’t think the analogy lands, but it hardly seems grounds for doubting good faith. And err, yes, not everyone is billed for water or electricity on the same terms as private homes. >This is not a complicated concept to understand, please make an effort. You could leave this out? It’s not the most effective way to bring people round to your point of view.
        deleted 6mo ago
        [deleted]

foldr 6mo ago

It doesn't meet a perfect theoretical definition of net neutrality, but it's a set of defined legal limits on the extent to which providers can treat different kinds of traffic differently.

daedrdev 6mo ago
Ok but the main limit people care about is music and video streaming being treated differently
- foldr 6mo ago
  What would be the model of a country with stronger net neutrality laws? I think EU regulations are now a touch stronger than UK regulations due to post-Brexit divergence, but by world standards, the UK has strong net neutrality protections.
hamdingers 6mo ago
Net neutrality is not theoretical, it is literally the default setting. Any deviation from that default requires special effort be taken to identify network traffic and treat it differently, and as soon as you have made that effort you cannot truthfully claim to have net neutrality. The UK does not prohibit net neutrality but it does not require it either (according to the comment I replied to which I have not verified).
- foldr 6mo ago
  I guess to me this seems a bit like saying that free markets are the default setting. We’re not in some kind of perfect state of nature. We’re in a complex interconnected society where virtually everything of any importance is regulated to some extent. What you’re saying seems like saying “as soon as you impose one regulation you no longer have a free market”.
  - hamdingers 6mo ago
    This non sequitur strains my ability to assume good faith on your part. We're not talking about markets, we're talking about a utility. Does your water company bill you differently depending on what you use the water for? Your gas company? Electric? This is not a complicated concept to understand, please make an effort.
    - foldr 6mo ago
      It’s just an analogy. I can understand if you don’t think the analogy lands, but it hardly seems grounds for doubting good faith. And err, yes, not everyone is billed for water or electricity on the same terms as private homes. >This is not a complicated concept to understand, please make an effort. You could leave this out? It’s not the most effective way to bring people round to your point of view.
      - deleted 6mo ago
        [deleted]