(November 23, 2017 at 4:30 am)pool the matey Wrote: Wow that's seem unfair
Aroura Wrote:so they would have built in incentives to feed you their stuff at top speed, while throttling competitive website speeds down so they are basically unusable
So like if my normal internet speed is this much (for all websites):
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
And Facebook pays for more speed will I:
a) get Facebook in this speed:
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
And every other site in this speed:
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
OR
b) get Facebook in this speed:
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
And every other site in this speed:
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
(in this case the speed Facebook paid for is subtracted from the speed of sites that didn't pay, in the first case the speed of other sites remain the same and Facebook gets a additional boost)
With net neutrality gone it won't just be limited to speed throttling... think more along the lines of purchasing channel packages, except in this case, website packages. Essential sites can end up becoming PPV, forget good quality voice calls on whatsapp and similar, separate charges for data for online gaming, video streaming e.t.c, and worse, constant monitoring of your activities by your ISP without any accountability.
But in this version of the bill at least it won't get that bad, you still will have the right to sue your ISP by yourself provided you can gather the necessary evidence against them, and have enough cash to stand against them in court. Good luck
