Re: Canada gets first, bitter dose of metered Internet

Well, it says more than that but ok.

 

My problem is that both sides say some massively contradictory stuff that
all seems to be valid and true.  So the end result  seems bad either way
(except for mobile broad band which is not affected).  

 

So why change something to do nothing?  Reading the articles about it is
dizzying.

 

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Bruce Geerdes
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 3:47 PM
To: DADL (off topic)
Subject: Re: [DADL-OT] Canada gets first, bitter dose of metered Internet

 

On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Karl Swenson <[email protected]> wrote:

Are you assuming that you will be billed only for access, and Netflix will
be free?

 

I don't follow.

 

To answer though, I hate the thought of any kind of consumer bandwith
charge.  I made sense when the infrastructure was struggling, but not any
more.

 

Net neutrality doesn't speak to whether we'll have metered billing or not.
But it says that if we *do* have metered billing, ISPs can't single out
sources like Netflix or Youtube for better or worse pricing.

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot