The network neutrality double-speak

I will agree that it does not likely rise to the legal standards of false advertising (though I find the selling of a 1.5 meg and a 10 meg pipe to be rather duplicitous if the 'higher end' product is still likely to only pull 300-400 kilobaud during peak hours... grumble grumble) but I think it still defeats the value of their argument that they need to restrict bandwidth based on application usage. It reminds me of airliners overbooking flights. There the airlines response when the flight is too full is to ask for volunteers to take a later flight and grant them perks for their difficulties. If instead the airlines were to state that they were refusing or reducing access to the flight for frequent flyers, stating that they were somehow abusing their privilege to fly, there would be a riot at JFK. I know, I know, one is an unlimited use service and one is not, but anytime that you hear stories of data caps and the like it frustrates the hell out of me. If you state that usage is unlimited then that is what it should be. If you state that you can provide a certain width pipe then that is what should be provided.

-- JohnPowerHely - 11 Dec 2008