Because the [total cost/user] value is much lower on streaming video. They can charge thousands-millions of customers a small amount to be able to stream the same sets of videos. A similar comparison would be a shared, public concert vs a private concert for your family alone. Those things have much different costs.

I'm not saying that that's good or bad, but does that help you understand the argument?

Not all bits are created equally.

But is there a meaningful difference there?

Not all bits are created equally.

That notion is literally the core of the Net Neutrality debate.

---

EDIT: I replied to another post which someone deleted before I could submit. So an elaboration on my point above:

At the end of the day, it's all marketing.

Remote desktop being the "standard rate" and Video being free isn't meaningfully different from Video being the "standard rate" and remote desktop being "standard rate * 1.5". It's just how it's being sold to you.

I suppose we can fight the technicalities of net neutrality, but it will only mean you will pay more money, not less.