And the issue I was highlightning is, is that you just stop where your convenience is not affected. This is as arbritrary as it is selfish. You don't care about it, so it is a good thing if it disappears. People actually use Youtube and other other data intensive services for usefull things, for many people it actually would be a bad thing if they couldn't use it anymore. In Hungary Orban is severely limiting independent Radio and TV. The internet provides the last ressort to stream media critical of the government. It might not be of the slightest interest to you, but there are people who have a quite different view on this whole affair.

Well, I didn't.That's my whole point. Just because I don't have usage of something, I don't call it "non-essential". The other way round, just because I like something doesn't makes it essential per se. My parents never used the internet. For them private usage or the internet appears to be completely non essential. They couldn't care less if you and me couldn't use the internet tomorrow. Does it mean, private internet is non essential?

Yes, and telephone lines and TV cable existed before the internet and will continue if streaming the internet were to disapear. Postal office and newspapers existed before telephone and TV cable and will continue to exist if electronic communication were to disappear. The whole point is: you don't have usage for video and you declare it non essential. I say, that your distinction is arbritrary and pointless.

People will also limit the usage of internet in general with their mobiles if it gets too expensive. With high roaming costs for Euopeans this is actually an issue when crossing borders (which happens quite easily with all those small countries). Following your line of argument the whole internet is not essential.

One could say as well food, water and shelter are essential. The rest is convenience. But making an arbritrary distinction between the essential "internet" and non-essential "video via internet" doesn't make too much sense.

Well, it would be good for the environment if we used less electricity and fuel. So, yes, it is a good thing to encourage people to reduce their usage using taxes. And boy, do we have taxes on fuel in Europe! But what is the burden of video streaming? Which resources are depleted just because the existing grid is used to transport more information? Who would be interested in limiting information flow? Well, people like Viktor Orban would be very much interested in it. For him this is a very nice situation. If people continue using Youtube, his government will receive more money. If not - good for him as well. All those annoying people broadcasting unpleasent things about him via Youtube would lose viewers.

The Turkish president Erdogan would agree full heartedly. Youtbue, Twitter - complete nonsense. Especially when people use those things to criticise his politics. So he shut those serivces down. Why whining - as it is non essential anyway?

What, stupid people in Hungary use Facebook and Youtube to criticise their government as independent newspapers, radio and TV have been shut down? Well, their bad if they use the same channel as those who just use them to distribute the latest news about their cats.

Sure, there was distant learning even before the internet using mail. Why stop with videos? Internet is not essential for private persons. They can go back to use the telephone and good old mail. And while we are at it: TV is also not essential, neither are Radio and lots and lots of other things. Just ask the Amish.

Who are you to decide what is essential and what is not? On Youtube one can watch cats falling from chairs, but as well online lectures about a wide range of topics, panel discussions, political and social comments, media critics and so on and so on. Just because you don't have a demand in videos doesn't mean that videos are in general something superfluous and something which is ok to get rid of.

Just for the record: that train is made in Germany. The technology which is used there is roughly 30 years old. It is not used elsewhere because for must cases it is simply too epxensive.