FCC to propose a minimum 100mbps to qualify as broadband, future goal of 1gbps [pdf]

Re:FCC to propose a minimum 100mbps to qualify as broadband,... by musha68k on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @04:27PM (#38104607)

ISPs face costs for peak usage / level of “playing with the numbers” yes, but economies of scale and exchange agreements reduce these costs significantly. Bandwidth caps not only have a weak financial justification but also run counter to net neutrality.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:FCC to propose a minimum 100mbps to qualify as broadband,... by cortesoft on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @07:17PM (#38106752)

How do bandwidth costs run counter to net neutrality? (Unless you are talking about certain types of traffic not counting against the caps)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:FCC to propose a minimum 100mbps to qualify as broadband,... by musha68k on Thursday November 02, 2023 @12:35PM (#38116139)

Zero-rating = skewing whole internet playing field, not just stifling small creators; subtly - or not so subtly - influences user behaviour, leading to a constrained experience. Users might feel financially pressured to use certain services, missing out on potentially superior or more diverse options, which goes against the original ethos of the open internet.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:FCC to propose a minimum 100mbps to qualify as broadband,... by cortesoft on Friday November 03, 2023 @11:44PM (#38137970)

Ok, so yeah you are talking about some data not counting against the cap. I agree, that violates net neutrality.

A pure cap that counts all traffic the same wouldn’t be, though.

[ Parent | on HN ]