• El Barto@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    58
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Edit 2: Well, at least I know I’m right. Downvote away.

    Sorry, I’m all for net neutrality, but behavior based on browser usage, while dickish, has nothing to do with it.

    Edit: it seems like I’m being schooled. Got any sources to back up your downvotes?

    Edit 3: nope. I’m not being schooled. The downvoters should either get better informed or stop downvoting with their emotions.

    • prole@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Hmmm, not sure why people are downvoting…

      Maybe these days people are using the term “net neutrality” in a broader sense to just mean equitable access, rather than the specific meaning that’s been used in the past to refer to ISP behavior and giving preference based on how much is paid.

    • Zunon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      yes it does, net neutrality not only has to do with the ISP but also the services. different useragent string should NOT lead to a worse quality of service.

      • vithigar@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        Right, but your service provider has nothing to do with that difference. The fact that the entity you’re contacting on the other end of the connection is providing a degraded experience isn’t an internet service delivery problem.

        Your internet service, which is what net neutrality is concerned with, is distinct from services on the internet. In the same way that your phone service has nothing to do with the quality of service you get from HP’s telephone support line.

        • ag10n@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          The web is based on open standards; that’s what made it universally accessible. How does limiting access based on how you access the web benefit anyone?

          • prole@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Nobody is defending the practice, they’re just differentiating it from what we’ve previously referred to as “net neutrality,” which is 100% entirely about how ISPs process internet traffic, and not about the services being used within that traffic.

            Unless I missed the memo, and “net neutrality” means something different now.

          • vonbaronhans@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            It doesn’t, but that isn’t their point. They’re simply pointing out that existing net neutrality laws in the US usually only apply to ISPs and telcos, not internet businesses.