Post if you changed your mind about NN bc of how mad ppl are - Some people just want to watch the world ree

One one hand, people thinking it's acceptable to give corporations even more leeway regarding what they can or can't do with the internet is concerning, to say the least. On the other hand, less yanquis on the internet.
 
I've.
The current NN debate is not about charging consumers (us) to access different parts of the internet (e.g. "packs" inc. Social Packs, Educational Packs, Gaming Packs, etc.). It's about ISPs charging different sites varying amounts of money for service. Meaning an ISP can charge Reddit $15/1TB of downlink bandwidth, while they charge Netflix $5/1TB downlink bandwidth. NN as it is means Reddit and Netflix must be charged the same. But now, the repeal means that they can be charged differently. It sucks for Internet companies, but probably won't affect us.

And it makes some sense to charge differently. Sites like Netflix can be cached by ISP CDNs quite easily, which means the "actual" amount of bandwidth is greatly reduced. However, some sites may have content that frequently changes, so CDN caching is less effective as a result. Thus, more bandwidth is used. ISPs only get so much bandwidth to play with, so it makes sense to reward companies that are more efficient.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Fleeb
Kazami Yuuka said:
I've.
The current NN debate is not about charging consumers (us) to access different parts of the internet (e.g. "packs" inc. Social Packs, Educational Packs, Gaming Packs, etc.). It's about ISPs charging different sites varying amounts of money for service. Meaning an ISP can charge Reddit $15/1TB of downlink bandwidth, while they charge Netflix $5/1TB downlink bandwidth. NN as it is means Reddit and Netflix must be charged the same. But now, the repeal means that they can be charged differently. It sucks for Internet companies, but probably won't affect us.

And it makes some sense to charge differently. Sites like Netflix can be cached by ISP CDNs quite easily, which means the "actual" amount of bandwidth is greatly reduced. However, some sites may have content that frequently changes, so CDN caching is less effective as a result. Thus, more bandwidth is used. ISPs only get so much bandwidth to play with, so it makes sense to reward companies that are more efficient.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I mean, it's rather pathetic they use this as a disguise to promote it. Wireless companies only do this practice of prioritizing and capping because mobile bandwidth is so much more restrictive than wired internet, so that excuse is bull anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back