The Net Neutrality Debate All On One Page
techcrunch.com
The Net Neutrality Debate All On One Page
1–6 of 6 posts
Re: The Net Neutrality Debate All On One Page
#2Isn't the real issue here product labeling?
If an ISP wants to offer access to only wikipedia for 2 bucks a month why should there be a law against that? So long as they don't market their product as "Internet access" I see nothing wrong.
Re: The Net Neutrality Debate All On One Page
#3Isn't the real issue here product labeling? If an ISP wants to offer access to only wikipedia for 2 bucks a month why should there be a law against that? So long as they don't market their product as "Internet access" I see nothing wrong.
My main problem is that there's not quite enough competition in the ISP area. So if Verizon and Comcast both own newspapers we don't get any Craigslist.
Re: The Net Neutrality Debate All On One Page
#4To me it seems reasonable to have some kind of metering in place (a threshold could be placed at a high enough value that 99% of people would never run into it; the penalty for exceeding the threshold could be a slower connection, rather than a ridiculous bill statement). But I would find it completely unacceptable for an ISP to limit how users used their bandwidth.
Re: The Net Neutrality Debate All On One Page
#5To me it seems reasonable to have some kind of metering in place (a threshold could be placed at a high enough value that 99% of people would never run into it; the penalty for exceeding the threshold could be a slower connection, rather than a ridiculous bill statement). But I would find it completely unacceptable for an ISP to limit how users used their bandwidth.
Agreed, though they shouldn't be allowed to label that access as "unlimited".
Also agree with the poster below who bemoans the monopolistic nature of broadband. Many markets have only one or two viable options for broadband internet access.
Re: The Net Neutrality Debate All On One Page
#6Isn't the real issue here product labeling? If an ISP wants to offer access to only wikipedia for 2 bucks a month why should there be a law against that? So long as they don't market their product as "Internet access" I see nothing wrong.
My main problem is that there's not quite enough competition in the ISP area. So if Verizon and Comcast both own newspapers we don't get any Craigslist.
Sure, but if you pass this law you don't get free Wikipedia for life on your kindle. While the law seems well intentioned I don't think restricting business models is going to encourage competition.