>>51041982The internet is already not data neutral. Enforcing data neutrality is inefficient, because text data is less time sensitive than video and audio data. If you get an email .05 seconds late there's no difference. If each frame of a movie, show, or video call is delayed by .05 seconds there's a noticeable difference in jittering that's extremely inconvenient. Therefore, it is more efficient to prioritize certain kinds of data (audio/video) over others (text). A lot of people in support of net neutrality don't seem to understand that this is what it means (they seem to think it means there will be paid "fast lanes" for subscribing individuals and everyone else will be forced to have slower internet unless they pay more for a "fast lane"), what is already implemented (the internet is not data neutral and most/all providers prioritize video and audio data over text, called "Quality of Service" agreements), and who is actually benefiting from it.
The major reasons companies like Netflix and Google/YouTube are fighting for net neutrality is because the bill being implemented would force them to pay for the increased bandwidth they're already taking up for all their high-priority video/audio streaming and that would be inconvenient and costly for them.
>>51042139No.
>>51042295Netflix is actually in support of "net neutrality". Don't be dumb.
