mox@lemmy.sdf.org to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 年前FCC explicitly prohibits fast lanes, closing possible net neutrality loopholearstechnica.comexternal-linkmessage-square32fedilinkarrow-up1380arrow-down12
arrow-up1378arrow-down1external-linkFCC explicitly prohibits fast lanes, closing possible net neutrality loopholearstechnica.commox@lemmy.sdf.org to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 年前message-square32fedilink
minus-squarexePBMg9@lemmynsfw.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up19arrow-down1·1 年前The type of traffic shaping you are thinking off can still be done under net nutrailty and was never an issue.
minus-squarexenspidey@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down30·1 年前The things NN is trying to “solve” was never an issue either
minus-squareKraiden@kbin.runlinkfedilinkarrow-up12arrow-down1·1 年前Net neutrality is the status quo, it’s not trying to “solve” anything
minus-squarexenspidey@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down3·1 年前If it was the status quo then why have rules?
minus-squareShepherdPie@midwest.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7arrow-down1·1 年前Then it shouldn’t be an issue to implement it then right?
minus-squarexenspidey@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down3·1 年前But there’s never been an issue… Should Netflix pay more for their increased traffic… Yes, it’s not equal to my browsing.
The type of traffic shaping you are thinking off can still be done under net nutrailty and was never an issue.
The things NN is trying to “solve” was never an issue either
Net neutrality is the status quo, it’s not trying to “solve” anything
If it was the status quo then why have rules?
Then it shouldn’t be an issue to implement it then right?
But there’s never been an issue… Should Netflix pay more for their increased traffic… Yes, it’s not equal to my browsing.