[Tricks]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

It's not the same, delivering an envelope or a fridge. It is the same, delivering a data packet and a data packet.

But what's different is the volume of data being sent and delivered.

CKA, in the grand scheme of things, takes up little space on the net.

Netflix, OTOH, probably uses more bandwidth every second of every day than CKA uses all year.

So why should Netflix pay the same as Trevor?

Because Netflix paying to have consistent internet speed can slow down Trevor. Would you prefer that?

[herbie]

Like I said Hop, you pay $50 a month and I was obligated to pay $4000 a month because I was "Competing".
That required some sort of filtering so 100 people could share one line and break even.
Then tack on that we couldn't offer free laptops or Dell desktops if you sign a conract, or half price for six months.
The rules make it so there can't be real competition.

[DrCaleb]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

It's not the same, delivering an envelope or a fridge. It is the same, delivering a data packet and a data packet.

But what's different is the volume of data being sent and delivered.

CKA, in the grand scheme of things, takes up little space on the net.

Netflix, OTOH, probably uses more bandwidth every second of every day than CKA uses all year.

So why should Netflix pay the same as Trevor?

Netflix doesn't pay the same as Trevor. They pay for a much wider and faster pipe than Trevor. Making Trevor pay for internet access from his ISP, then making him negotiate access contracts and pay for access to Bell and Telus and Comcast and Verizon and . . . is ludicrous! It's equally insane to make Netflix do it.

And it breaks the standards the internet was built on. Data is data, and it costs no more to deliver one packet over the next packet. Just because it's run through a packet filter and determined to originate from Netflix vs CKA does not make the packet more expensive to forward to it's destination.

[DrCaleb]

herbie herbie:

The rules make it so there can't be real competition.

And that also needs to change, but it's not part of the net neutrality debate.

[bootlegga]

Tyler_1 Tyler_1:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

What the hell are you watching?

\
Now back on topic or who knows what.

Nasty, none of them washed their hands!

[bootlegga]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

It's not the same, delivering an envelope or a fridge. It is the same, delivering a data packet and a data packet.

But what's different is the volume of data being sent and delivered.

CKA, in the grand scheme of things, takes up little space on the net.

Netflix, OTOH, probably uses more bandwidth every second of every day than CKA uses all year.

So why should Netflix pay the same as Trevor?

Netflix doesn't pay the same as Trevor. They pay for a much wider and faster pipe than Trevor. Making Trevor pay for internet access from his ISP, then making him negotiate access contracts and pay for access to Bell and Telus and Comcast and Verizon and . . . is ludicrous! It's equally insane to make Netflix do it.

And it breaks the standards the internet was built on. Data is data, and it costs no more to deliver one packet over the next packet. Just because it's run through a packet filter and determined to originate from Netflix vs CKA does not make the packet more expensive to forward to it's destination.