IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 1 active user | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Not up to the service providers.
A user should get X amount of bandwidth, regardless of how they wish to use it. If an ISP has an issue with how that bandwidth is used they can throttle it all equally, not based on the content.

That Google has a way around this is immaterial. YTF should an ISP care what a user is using their bandwidth for?

Throttling by content is just a way for an ISP to limit bandwidth without actually telling their customers that they're limiting bandwidth. If they want to start picking and choosing then they can deal with losing common carrier status and as a result start being responsible for what is going down their lines.
Regards,
-scott
Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
New Pretty much my POV on that
they want the protection of being a common carrier, and want to charge both ends of the transaction. Shorter: they want to have their cake and eat it too.

Telecom in North America sucks.
New I had the cake line in my post and deleted it :-)
Wanting to charge both ends is another succinct way of putting it.
Regards,
-scott
Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
New Well said, both of you.
     Verizon using Net Nutrality to kill Netflix (and AWS) - (drook) - (8)
         That didn't take long. - (a6l6e6x)
         Why is google so fast? - (boxley) - (4)
             Not up to the service providers. - (malraux) - (3)
                 Pretty much my POV on that - (jake123) - (2)
                     I had the cake line in my post and deleted it :-) - (malraux)
                     Well said, both of you. -NT - (Another Scott)
         Does Verizon really want to upset AWS? - (static) - (1)
             Looks like collateral damage -NT - (drook)

Screw it, we're fighting Cirque de Soleil! Run for your life!
78 ms