- Joined
- Aug 24, 2014
- Messages
- 4,839
- Trophies
- 0
- Age
- 27
- Location
- Fort Gay, West Virginia
- XP
- 2,300
- Country
Same for you 100% (If I could use the emoji I would)I am just going to say that I respect you, but you are kind wrong on this one
Anyway I realistically do not expect a response since it is late in the night so I am likely to not respond to further discussion until the morning.
First, you argued that ISPs are hurt by services like Netflix and Youtube, expect they aren't. ISPs put a data cap on your service, thus meaning they've already determined how much data you can use before it starts effecting them. This means you've already gotten a set amount of data to do anything you want with, so long as it doesn't go above that cap. Thus every service you use, they've already calculated into your bill.
In a large sense whenever there is a service the fact of the matter is while the bill is calculated that does not mean all costs are ultimately equal since the profit yield from the same item or service can vary. Thus they have an incentive to make means to reduce such cost even in cases where the product or service is profitable for the seller. This is just simply a matter of business and nothing else.
If I go the Subway as you described and ask for tuna rather than ham, they have the full rights toSecond, your idea that they have the right to tell you what you can and can't do is simply wrong. That would be like me walking into Subway, ordering a tuna sub, and them telling me that I am getting ham because it's their store. ISPs are a service provider, they are a customer service company like every other company. They should not have the power to determine what you can and can't do, so long as it's within the law.
1. Charge more (due to the costs and other reasons)
and
2. Not offer equal service (due to inherent nature)
Now to say that this comparison is correct is a stretch at best. As a service/product provider they have the right to tell you what you can do, can't do, how to do it, and charge more or less for what it is. Its like why not hire a lawn mower for an hour and then expect him to devote 20 minutes of the time to weed eating if that is the case?
I support that 100% as that is thier right to do that and they should. To say that they should not have that right is just ludicrous.Finally, you keep ignoring the issues with censorship. Without NN, ISPs will have the power to determine who gets the best speeds and who doesn't. This isn't just limited to sites like Youtube, this includes the entire internet. If Comcast (for example) decides they don't like the content on GBATemp, they can legally slow it down. From they have the power to decide what happens, they can demand the site completely strip itself of hacking related content, they demand the staff/users to pay a higher fee to access that site at full speed, or they can simply lag the site death. Without NN, the ISP has all the power over what you can see.
And if you don't think they will try to starve out a service, realize they've already tried to do it before
Last edited by RevPokemon,