Hi, > Been trying to keep up with the Net Neutrality debate but obviously > it's a confusing issue. My question is, don't we already pay for faster > service? Don't websites pay based on the amount of bandwidth they need > to serve out? I know I pay a premium price for cable internet service > because I get more bandwidth. Seems like most people are willing to > keep going as we are now -- where the price is proportional to the > speed. > How is what the telecoms are proposing different? Are they suggesting > that they should be allowed to arbitrarily limit or increase the > speeds with which certain sites or traffic can reach me, regardless of > what that site and I are paying in terms of bandwidth?
The idea being that the site you are connecting to -- when it is _not_ on the same network provider that you are -- should have to pay _your_ network provider 'something' for that traffic they send into your provider's network; that if _they_ don't pay your provider, *you* get degraded service for access to that site, relative to those who do pay "Dane-geld".