Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

Re:Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality by habosa on Tuesday January 16, 2018 @10:22PM (#16165201)

That has nothing to do with net neutrality. These companies are free under any form of the law to offer you a small-cap low-speed plan for a small fee but they don't bother.

If they restricted the services you could access or their relative speeds, then you get into trouble.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality by droopybuns on Wednesday January 17, 2018 @12:41AM (#16165745)

This is the fundamental misunderstanding.

Most in the ISP crowd agree with what you are agreeing with. But the net neutrality folks predominantly reject this approach.

I want surgery over IP. I don’t want surgical packets treated the same as a YouTube packet.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality by wtallis on Wednesday January 17, 2018 @05:59AM (#16166963)

> I want surgery over IP. I don’t want surgical packets treated the same as a YouTube packet.

Do you really think these two statements are at all related?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality by arca_vorago on Wednesday January 17, 2018 @02:52AM (#16166225)

Then buy a dedicated line with SLA's and such in writing. I don't understand how people don't understand this by now.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality by vertex-four on Wednesday January 17, 2018 @06:57AM (#16167206)

You definitely don't want surgery over the Internet - what happens when someone slices through your local fibre cable, for a start? Think about what you're saying.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality by Majora320 on Wednesday January 17, 2018 @02:29AM (#16166134)

You can pay for lower latency on your end.

[ Parent | on HN ]