Binge On! - And So This is Net Neutrality?
lyle at lcrcomputer.net
Fri Nov 20 19:22:46 UTC 2015
It leaves more data available to use within your data plan, but may
reduce bandwidth available to you to actually use. In other words, you
may find your billed usage unusable due to lack of usable bandwidth.
'Oh it's free, I will set my phone to stream all Monty Python movies
But I think this answer is more in line with the intent of your
question, why would someone want to try to startup a new service that
doesn't fit within the guidelines of these 'free' services.
LCR Computer Services, Inc.
On 11/20/2015 12:30 PM, Joly MacFie wrote:
> Logic tells me that, if the major incumbents content doesn't count against
> the cap, this leaves more bandwidth for other applications. What am I
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 12:46 PM, Blake Hudson <blake at ispn.net> wrote:
>> It's not. And that's the point.
>> This proposal, and ones similar, stifle growth of applications. If there
>> are additional (artificial) burdens for operating in a field it becomes
>> harder to get into. Because it's harder to get into, fewer operators
>> compete. [Note, we just reduced open competition, one tenet of Net
>> Neutrality] Because there are fewer operators there will be less
>> competition. Less competition increases prices and fewer customers take the
>> service. Because few people use the application, the network operator has
>> no incentive to support the application well. [Note, we just reduced the
>> freedom to run applications] Because the network doesn't support the
>> application well, few people use the application. It's circular and it
>> slows growth.
>> Just because there may be inherent challenges to offering an application
>> (bandwidth, for example), doesn't mean that adding another one (per
>> application bandwidth caps) is desirable.
More information about the NANOG