Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "RIP in Peace, Net Neutrality" video.

"to watch Netflix in full HD you have to pay to get the bandwith, if you just want to watch the stupid blog, fine get 5 mbit / mont" - You are thinking of yourself and not the entire network. If a person is playing Fortnite or whatever in his 5mbit/sec connection, his game will be impacted by the thousands of people paying for the bandwidth to watch Netflix. Even though a videogame often only needs to send and receive game updates which are typically small. When you pay for bandwidth, you are not reserving your own lane in a highway. You still have to share with everyone.
2
@douwehuysmans5959 "if everyone would torrent instead of Netflix, the same amount of bandwith would be used" - no, because the torrented file would be accessible multiple times. I don't know if anything has changed in the last two years, but Luke's argument is that Netflix would force you to redownload the video if you fell asleep and needed to go back to where you were. "Netflix DOES have to pay for the bandwith they're using" - Paying for what you're using is disingenuous. It's not how much they're using, it's how. It's a traffic pile up caused by Uber or whatever and Uber claims "we pay our taxes so we get to use the road" yeah but I want to use the road too and you clogged it!
2
@douwehuysmans5959 I mean, the fact that internet connectivity does take a nosedive at peak load times contradicts your argument.
2
@douwehuysmans5959 I am European and I have fiber. The network is overwhelmed due to the quick boom in video streaming usage.
2
"If I paid for 100 mbps, I should get 100 mbps" - Services like Netflix are ensuring that you're not gonna get 100mbps at peak hours because your local hub will have thousands of people streaming video.
1
@abdullahal-ahmati5030 And airline companies overbook and gyms sell subscriptions to people who never show up. This is a fact of life. You don't want to pay the real price of what it costs to service you. You pay taxes to use the road, right? What would happen if everyone in your country decided to travel the same road? How dare the government charge your to build a road, and then everyone can't use it at the same time? How dare they "sell" you a road that they know is incapable of servicing the entire country?
1
@abdullahal-ahmati5030 Nobody brought up race. Airline companies do charge extra for heavy luggage, though.
1
@abdullahal-ahmati5030 "Netflix is literally the black people of internet traffic." - Okay redditor. "ISPs do charge extra for more data." - The issue here isn't data, but the fact that you're preventing "planes" from taking off. You can be extremely inconvenient while using very reasonable amounts of data. "Why should a byte of Netflix traffic cost more than a byte of other traffic?" - The issue is, a byte of Netflix, which isn't time-sensitive, shouldn't get ahead of people trying to play time-sensitive online games for example. And when your area is filled of people hogging bandwidth through Netflix, the service quality decays. "It would be like an airline saying your baggage is in a suitcase with the wrong branding, so it will cost 10% more. " - No, it's more like, you brought 300 suitcases and it's gonna take an extra hour to reshuffle the baggage because of load balancing inside the cargo bay, and everyone's pissed off that their plane isn't taking off and you say "excuse me, I paid for the extra luggage" as if your money pays for the inconvenience you're causing. No airliner would let you do that, that's how ludicrous this is.
1
@abdullahal-ahmati5030 "If the airliner is selling space for 300 suitcases, then any delays are completely their fault" - No. You missed every warning to start loading your luggage, and then right when everyone's ready for takeoff you suddenly want to load your shit on the plane. "If I bought space for 300 suitcases from the plane, why does it matter if it is 300 kg of my clothes or 300 kg of my hygiene products. I paid for data. Why does it matter if that data is a netflix video packet or a video game packet?" - The video game packet is only a small suitcase. Netflix is a bunch of suitcases and even though everyone needs to take off in time, you want to delay everyone's data with your streaming. "They absolutely would." - No, they would not. You'd get delayed. "It's a service called "cargo planes"." - The "cargo plane" service is a fast lane. Want a cargo plane? Hire one. "Those boots sure are delicious, huh?" - Buddy you're out here simping for large internet corporations and you're calling me a bootlicker? I'm not defending ISPs. I am attacking people like you, who believed the corporate propaganda simply because they thought they were being anti-corporation. "What if people hog bandwidth through streaming?" - They don't get to bitch and moan when ISPs prioritize online videogames over Netflix stability. "Or what if they hog bandwidth by writing huge emails and sending it to 1000s of people?" - Most email servers limit attachment sizes and I don't think anyone complains if an email arrives a half-second later. "ISPs then should offer low-latency high-priority internet connections." - According to Net Neutrality, that's illegal. That would not be "neutral". "What does this mean?" - If you have a 500GB limit per month, and use up 10GB per day from 9PM to 10PM, you'll be more of a nuisance than someone who uses 10GB from 9AM to 11PM.
1
@abdullahal-ahmati5030 "When I buy internet, I buy a certain connection speed." - When you pay taxes for your roads, you're not buying into a certainty you'll never get a traffic jam. "This argument is a pure con by a monopoly supported by lobbying to remove any regulations that still keep them in check." - I'm European. We have regulations. Internet performance dips during peak load times because, go figure, people blast 1080p and 4k content non-stop starting from 9PM till it's time to sleep. "No I won't if the ISP wasn't being greedy and selling much more bandwidth than their network could handle." - Okay, let's force ISPs to sell you the actual bandwidth they can guarantee you. Get ready for your blazing fast 1Mbps because the ISP has to divide their bandwidth by every household serviced by your local node. "A responsible ISP will factor in what percentage of users use their bandwidth at a certain time to calculate what speeds they offer." - And they most likely did that, and the only problem they had was torrenting. The issue was when video streaming took off and services started growing faster than infrastructure can get built. "You are completely missing the point. ISPs should not be allowed to discriminate against services" - Then why did you suggest it? "It would be like a road denying entry to BMW cars because Ford paid off the road owner." - Right now we're denying entry in certain roads to cars manufactured in 1996 and earlier. There's probably a diesel ban in the works. "If I am sending a letter through the post, why would it matter if my letter contains a political essay or a photograph" - Pretty sure corporations that deal with high volume of mail contract out special services to not overwhelm the normal mail carriers. Imagine if you couldn't send a letter because the local post office is stacked to the top with envelopes from a company that runs a mailing campaign. Even though envelope size might be the same, the aggressive mailing will occupy a larger volume and require more workload than an envelope with a photograph you send every day.
1
@abdullahal-ahmati5030 "In China they implemented a policy where on certain days license plates that start with certain letters are banned from the road, which is exactly what throttling based on packet contents is like" - Having to wait a fraction of a second to let more time-sensitive packages get through before you isn't the same as getting blocked from Netflix on days ending with Y. "How did video streaming take off if ISPs hadn't oversold their capacity? If video streaming took off, that means people streamed video, which means ISPs could handle video streaming." - No shit, video streaming was easier to handle when only early adopters were doing it? "their bandwidth turned out to be a lie." - That's a way to look at it, but for the sake of consistency we'll need to abolish gyms, airlines and roads. The roads are a lie, the gyms are a lie, airlines are a lie. Nothing works if everyone decides to use it at the same time. "They are still allowed to offer services with different speeds and latencies. They just cannot throttle based on the contents of the data you are sending." - The fucking fast lane was the whole point of contention. People didn't want them. If you agree that fast lanes could be on offer, then you at least have to disagree with some of the NN slacktivists bitching about the issue. "But how does this analogy relate to byte packets? Unless you carry out Chinese-style packet inspection, all packets have mostly the same features. One packet does not emit more CO2 than another packet, and all packets fall within 200 bytes." - Engines made decades ago are less efficient and more pollutant, while the diesel compression requires a very lean mix to be introduced into the cylinder and causes atmospheric N2 and O2 to combine into NOx compounds. The molecule of fuel contains the same chemical energy no matter which engine you use, but those engines output more pollution for the same mechanical work put through the wheels. Either way, there's no China style packet inspection. My mobile carrier had a plan where I was given "unlimited"* data for certain apps. Then one day I get a text saying "oh yeah the regulatory agency told us that this free data shit is unfair and violates Net Neutrality so you're gonna pay up". They can zero-rate the apps but once you're through your data limit, you need to pay for extra data to use the zero-rated apps. It's fucking annoying. There was no China style inspection involved. "Netflix already pays huge amounts for their used bandwidth" - the issue is, services like Netflix are what's considered an "unreasonable" user. Check your contract. It probably has a reasonable use clause. They definitely had a special agreement with ISPs in place and they really disliked it, which is why internet companies started to lobby for NN. *about the "unlimited" data. It was actually 10-15GB. Never got anywhere close to the limit. But that was the reasonable use policy. "data centers closer to their customers" - Which can just as easily overwhelm the local network. It's a cold hard fact that things like online gaming experience deteriorate after 9PM because of peak load. Doesn't matter if the data Netflix sends isn't hogging the bandwidth on the Atlantic fiber cable, it's hogging the bandwidth near my access point.
1
"How am I paying for everyone else's bandwidth in a NN system? If I don't use streaming or other intensive services then I pay for a lower kbps." - There's still plans with kbps? (I realize some people live in underserviced zones, it's a joke) You are paying for everyone else's bandwidth. The ISP is not charging you for those "kbps" or "mbps", the ISP is charging you a rate they think makes them enough money to maintain their business and still be able to pocket something for themselves. Their service is tiered but whatever they charge for the lowest tier is based on a function of how many people actually want this tier and how much are they willing to pay for it. "You imply through your images that trivial entertainment like porn, cartoons and a Christmas Story are a less worthy usage of bandwidth than posting on 4chan or sharing your linguistics paper" - But that's not the point. Video streaming, especially done in very optimized fashion, requires more bandwidth. Posting on 4chan requires almost nothing. It's not moralism, it's the fact that I'm being a "good neighbor" and everyone else is being a "bad neighbor" by hogging bandwidth. "which is an entirely subjective evaluation that neither you nor, and more to the point, ISPs have any right to make" - Truckers pay higher toll taxes in many countries. I'm pretty sure that size and weight of a vehicle is an objective evaluation. And the state or private entity that manages the road has the right to judge the cost of using the road based on the class of vehicle. "I don't care what other people use their bandwidth for, I'm going to be making my purchasing decisions based on my own usage, not anyone else's." - But that's actually the problem. When I need to turn around in a fast paced video game that only needs to phone to the server with updates in position and game state to get that guy who's about to shoot me, I have thousands of people on Netflix who are trying to get their packets around me who are negatively impacting my ability to have my shot accurately recorded by the server. Everyone is thinking for themselves, and ignoring how they're being a nuisance to other users. And they won't even realize it because their show isn't time-sensitive and it buffers ahead.
1
"If I pay for 20 mbps, I wont affect the network by more than 20 mbps. If ISPs can't keep up with what they promise" - but like gyms selling subscriptions to people who don't exercise or airliners overbooking, you'll suffer the sticker shock if you're suddenly charged the "real value" it costs to keep your service running.
1