4 ms·
You only need two or three major website who blackout their services to the Comcast user and redirect them to a page explaining that situation. Imagine if their
by debian3 12y ago
You only need two or three major website who blackout their services to the Comcast user and redirect them to a page explaining that situation. Imagine if their subscriber can't access to Google and Facebook, and on that redirection page they target ads for alternative provider in your area. Would be nice to see how long Comcast would take to change their mind.
- Cakez0r 12y agoWhat about users who have no alternative to Comcast?
- knodi 12y agoYou mean people like me. I hope for a better tomorrow.
- kevinchen 12y agoThat is incredibly user-hostile. Google and Facebook would end up looking like the bad guys, and nothing would change.
- debian3 12y agoAnd doing the traffic shaping they did against Netflix is not?
- falsecelaona 12y agoNo it is not. ISP throttling their paying customers because of their internal nonsense is user-hostile. Informing consumers that they're being undermined by their ISP is quite possibly the most pro-consumer act you could do. If it gets us one step closer to treating the bandwidth like electricity or water, it's a good thing.
- kevinchen 12y agoTwo possibilities from the user's point of view: "Facebook is a little slow because my ISP might be throttling, but I'm not sure, it could also be my computer" "I cannot access Facebook at all because Facebook blocked my ISP" Getting users pissed off at web services is not a good way to effect change. We need users on our side, so we can't have them think of us as crybabies.