> I think the problem is less that there are companies who want to sell you "faster internet to specific websites" and more that there can't be any companies who want to sell you "fast internet to all websites."
I don't follow. You don't feel there are currently any companies that provide fast access to all websites? Perhaps that's true in some parts of the US, but it isn't true worldwide. That suggests there is another way to go about setting up a competitive environment that yields low cost, high speed internet.
> I'm just not sure it's fair to say that one side here is for content agnostic networks and the other is against them, but rather two different approaches to solving the problem where just about everyone agrees with content agnostic networks.
When your ISP middle man charges special access fees for certain data, that isn't content agnostic. It's specifically giving preference to some content over others based on big corporate $$.
I don't follow. You don't feel there are currently any companies that provide fast access to all websites? Perhaps that's true in some parts of the US, but it isn't true worldwide. That suggests there is another way to go about setting up a competitive environment that yields low cost, high speed internet.
> I'm just not sure it's fair to say that one side here is for content agnostic networks and the other is against them, but rather two different approaches to solving the problem where just about everyone agrees with content agnostic networks.
When your ISP middle man charges special access fees for certain data, that isn't content agnostic. It's specifically giving preference to some content over others based on big corporate $$.