@jeffw@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish • 2 months agoISPs can charge extra for fast gaming under FCC’s Internet rules, critics sayarstechnica.comexternal-linkmessage-square54fedilinkarrow-up1406arrow-down15cross-posted to: games@sh.itjust.workspcgaming@lemmy.catechnology@lemmy.zip
arrow-up1401arrow-down1external-linkISPs can charge extra for fast gaming under FCC’s Internet rules, critics sayarstechnica.com@jeffw@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish • 2 months agomessage-square54fedilinkcross-posted to: games@sh.itjust.workspcgaming@lemmy.catechnology@lemmy.zip
minus-square@almost1337@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglish17•2 months agoPer the article, this looks to be limited to mobile internet and not traditional broadband. While I can understand the practicality of carving out unique bands of the wireless spectrum for specific uses, charging extra for it seems scummy.
minus-square@stembolts@programming.devlinkfedilinkEnglish10•2 months agoIts always, no no this is for X, not Y. (a few years pass) They accepted X, now there is precedent, let’s take Y. This is the start, not the finish. Fight this or it will make its way to your interests. My $0.02.
minus-square@KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglish3•2 months agoSure, it’s $0.02 now, but in a few years that’ll be precedent and you’ll start asking for $0.04. I’m on to your game!
Per the article, this looks to be limited to mobile internet and not traditional broadband. While I can understand the practicality of carving out unique bands of the wireless spectrum for specific uses, charging extra for it seems scummy.
Its always, no no this is for X, not Y.
(a few years pass)
They accepted X, now there is precedent, let’s take Y.
This is the start, not the finish.
Fight this or it will make its way to your interests.
My $0.02.
Sure, it’s $0.02 now, but in a few years that’ll be precedent and you’ll start asking for $0.04. I’m on to your game!