|
|
|
|
|
by tabtab
2703 days ago
|
|
Re: It's because those scenarios were just as outlandish and uninformed as those against net neutrality. Both "sides" often exaggerate their points; that's politics 101. That doesn't mean that all of their predictions will be entirely wrong. Re: blocking Netflix unless you pay extra wasn't going to be a thing How do you know they wouldn't eventually do that? If they have competing content, it would be profitable for them to charge more for competitor content. Do I need to make a spreadsheet for you to show you why? Why would they otherwise skip profits? |
|
If all you had to do to make profits was impose whatever outlandish pricing models pop into your head, everyone would do it and internet would cost infinity dollars.
No one would actually pay this. There'd be mass outrage and as much as the memes like to imply Ajit Pai works for Comcast, the FCC would easily be forced to step in (no blanket net neutrality law doesn't mean the FCC isn't allowed to step in when needed).
It's in the best interests of the ISP to not do egregious things that force the FCCs hand or stir up public outrage.