|
|
|
|
|
|
by Cody-99
813 days ago
|
|
|
Twitch left Korea because of their crazy fees that would be prohibited under net neutrality. ISPs double dip and charge websites/companies like twitch, Youtube, etc to deliver data and also charge their users money at the same time.
https://restofworld.org/2024/south-korea-twitch-exit-problem... >The problem stems from a “sender pays” rule instituted by South Korea’s Ministry of Science and ICT in 2016, to address the growing interconnection demands of video streaming and other bandwidth-intensive services. The rule requires companies to compensate the receiving networks for the traffic they send. It’s meant to tax heavy senders like Netflix and YouTube. Livestreaming sites like Twitch face particularly steep fees, as low latency is critical for live content. >The “sender pays” model has been widely criticized by net neutrality advocates: In a recent statement calling for the repeal of the rule in the wake of Twitch’s exit, Open Net Korea warned that it “devastates the domestic content ecosystem” and “fragments the internet.” One doesn't need an example from just a few months ago to see why this is a bad idea. Acting like the internet is so different today than 5/10 years ago so you can try to dismiss good examples is silly and acting in bad faith. |
|
|
Also, it doesn't matter how old an example is: if we can all agree that companies doing this is bed, then we shouldn't allow it. "It was awful 10 years ago, and it would still be awful now, but it hasn't happened recently, so it must all be fine." is very short sighted.
Either net neutrality is good, and we should have it. Or net neutrality is bad, and you dont need "yeah but that was 10 years ago" as your counter. If you can make an argument for "ATT charging you to use facetime is a good thing", then make that argument. Not "but that was so long ago".
"Yeah I agree, those things were awful, lets make sure they happen again"