| Without usage charges? What do they mean by "without usage charges"?
Does that mean it doesnt go against the silly caps they have?
If so, I think we are venturing into the land of neutrality violations.
And before the silly arguments begin, dont even start with the stupid on network/off network angle as that does not make a bit of difference in last mile (their real concern) and whether or not they are picking winners and losers. |
|
| With good lawyers, they could beat net neutrality rules by saying they have a cap on internet usage, but not on intranet usage. That is essentially what they will do with their existing video service assuming they start enforcing the caps. |
|
| The internet from the public's view and perceptions starts at the modem/router that sits at their home and I would agree with that 100%.
It is also marketed and sold as such by every single ISP out there which is the exact meaning of ISP (internet service provider).
If the traffic comes across that modem/router in an IP form, then it is internet traffic regardless of where it originated or where its destined.
They can try to use smoke and mirrors to create their dream of little intertubes and toll ways and a lot of less intelligent people will fall for it, I however will not. |
|
