[zwieback]

I understand that. My hope is that we might be able to "unbundle" and get some benefit at the lower end. I don't want to subsidize the Netflix streamers by being forced into a neutral model. I'm looking for a cheaper slow lane.

[porqupine]

The Neutral model isn't so much about the terms the ISP is offering you as to how they fulfill those terms.

Let's say a consumer pays for a 20MB/S connection with unlimited bandwidth, now the ISP is going to throttle all streaming content on there to say 2MB/S - except (for example for Netflix which has an agreement with the ISP) - so as a consumer you might want to use Amazon Prime or Hulu - but nope -- all of those services are throttled, only Netflix is going to get the full 20MB/S.

Now of course the big companies will pay not to be throttled, but where does this leave, small companies? What if next time your ISP throttle wikileaks, or some indie internet comic, or any other websites which it finds politically disagreeable?

[nitrogen]

What's with this "I don't want to help anybody but myself" attitude I see come up whenever there's a discussion of taxes, welfare, or bandwidth pricing?

If you want a cheaper slow lane, it sounds like you are expecting the Netflix users to subsidize you.

[IBM]

Netflix users wouldn't be subsidizing him, they'd be paying more for the higher data they use.

[nitrogen]

This other comment suggests otherwise: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8344824

"I would love to have the people who are willing to pay for 1TB/m subsidize my slower tier."