This double dipping by ISPs annoys the hell out of me. Who should pay for bandwidth: the ISPs or content producers? How about--oh I don't know--the ISPs' customers who are already paying for bandwidth?
If there is any compelling argument for net neutrality it's this: don't let regional monopolies decide what sites their customers can access based on what kickbacks the ISP receives.
Widespread opt-out ad blocking will likely end in content producers blocking offending ISPs.
As for the particular case mentioned (YouTube bandwidth for Free) I would like to know if the take advantage of the edge caching available.
If there is any compelling argument for net neutrality it's this: don't let regional monopolies decide what sites their customers can access based on what kickbacks the ISP receives.
Widespread opt-out ad blocking will likely end in content producers blocking offending ISPs.
As for the particular case mentioned (YouTube bandwidth for Free) I would like to know if the take advantage of the edge caching available.
All in a this reads as a pro-ISP fluff piece.