4 ms·
Weakness in your argument 1: "bit-torrenting The Avengers" is a Strawman - illegal things are illegal and should dealt with regardless of net neutrality. Every
by UweSchmidt 13y ago
Weakness in your argument 1:
"bit-torrenting The Avengers" is a Strawman - illegal things are illegal and should dealt with regardless of net neutrality. Everyone does a load of stuff on the Internet, who's to decide what should have priority? Games? Email? Business? Youtube?
Weakness in your argument 2:
Slippery Slope. Let's see if "not making it easier to buy better access" is a good thing, regardless if it affects Netflix and their hypothetical attempt of "using a private network parallel to the Internet".
ISPs should not care where the packets are coming from, end of story. Agree?
- zhemao 13y agoYou're missing the point of his argument 1. It isn't that pirating is illegal, it's that torrenting by nature has less strict bandwidth and latency requirements than VoIP calling.
- UweSchmidt 13y agoGood point.
- pgeorgi 13y agoThen make it "downloads and seeds the entire open source catalog out there" - it's still that the friendly neighbor won't care about a few kbps less while those can make or break a VoIP line.
- Rusky 13y agoThe bittorrent vs voip argument has nothing to do with legality- it applies equally well if the torrent is of a Linux install iso. On purely technical grounds, some data is simply higher priority than others. What this means is that good net neutrality rules are more nuanced than you "ISPs should not care where the packets are coming from, end of story." QoS needs to be factored in.