Comment Re:Because it's ours (Score 1) 499
I tend to think that the analogy is flawed.
Rather than how much to charge, it's more of a QoS thing. Oil companies have to supply a minimum quality fuel. You can buy the minimum quality fuel and your car will still run without damage or decreased performance. You can also buy 'super' fuel, and your car will run (unnoticably by the average person) better or possibly get slightly better economy.
In terms of Internet, it is similar thing. We have a standard minimum quality service. We can nowadays pay for higher bandwidth services and high speed VPNs etc, with more noticable differences than super fuel of course.
If oil companies could offer fuel mixed with water as the standard minimum, and charge more for the current standard fuel so that your vehicle ran properly, then these anti-neutrality people would have an analogy that worked.
I guess it's all a moot point anyway. Ten years ago, the question of allowing commercial interests to charge subscriptions for content was a hot topic. Then came the debate of advertising. Now we can argue about QoS. The power of the 'mighty' dollar will once again prevail and I fear that once the novelty of screaming about this is over, we'll all have to wear it anyway...and pay for it.
Cheers
Rather than how much to charge, it's more of a QoS thing. Oil companies have to supply a minimum quality fuel. You can buy the minimum quality fuel and your car will still run without damage or decreased performance. You can also buy 'super' fuel, and your car will run (unnoticably by the average person) better or possibly get slightly better economy.
In terms of Internet, it is similar thing. We have a standard minimum quality service. We can nowadays pay for higher bandwidth services and high speed VPNs etc, with more noticable differences than super fuel of course.
If oil companies could offer fuel mixed with water as the standard minimum, and charge more for the current standard fuel so that your vehicle ran properly, then these anti-neutrality people would have an analogy that worked.
I guess it's all a moot point anyway. Ten years ago, the question of allowing commercial interests to charge subscriptions for content was a hot topic. Then came the debate of advertising. Now we can argue about QoS. The power of the 'mighty' dollar will once again prevail and I fear that once the novelty of screaming about this is over, we'll all have to wear it anyway...and pay for it.
Cheers
