[ NNSquad ] Re: Comments on NNSquad Purpose

[Phil Karn <karn@ka9q.net>]

Russell Smiley wrote:

> Let's consider a real world example. My pay-as-you-go cellphone service
> charges something like 25c per minute for voice calls and 15c per text
> message - it's a bit more complicated than that, but let's keep it
> simple. Since both voice calls and text messages are effectively just
> packages of bits I think by the most general definition this defies Net
> Neutrality - so perhaps charging separately for text messaging and voice
> is a Bad Thing. On the other hand, under this plan I am able to maintain
> an effective monthly payment that is less than half of the minimum
> "monthly plan" subscription available to me so I'm pretty happy that Net
> Neutrality is not preserved in this case. 

I think you're confusing Net Neutrality with flat-vs-variable rate charging.

Net neutrality is neutrality with respect to the meaning and destination of the
bits that I send and receive. This is completely distinct from the number of
bits that I send and receive.

It is perfectly reasonable for carriers to charge by the bit, though many users
would prefer to pay a flat rate even though they end up paying more to get a
predictable bill. But when you do pay by the bit, the carrier has even less of
an excuse to tell me what I can do with those bits.