That’s not Net Neutrality. Comcast stopping a subscriber from visiting Parlor hosted on AWS would be violating Net Neutrality. It’s about getting there, not where it’s hosted. Amazon is fully in their rights to dictate what is hosted on their platform.
I’m aware of their stance, and I disagree with it. Beyond that, it’s simply a different issue than Net Neutrality and they aren’t conflating the two. It’s important to understand the difference, especially because a large number of Americans have little to no choice in Internet Service Providers.
It’s a kin to the water company refusing to provide water to a racist on your street. That’s wrong. Water is a utility and should be available to the home owner regardless. However, Walmart should not be obligated to stock water that racist bottles with racist slogans on it in their stores.
phillaholic@lemm.ee 1 year ago
That’s not Net Neutrality. Comcast stopping a subscriber from visiting Parlor hosted on AWS would be violating Net Neutrality. It’s about getting there, not where it’s hosted. Amazon is fully in their rights to dictate what is hosted on their platform.
False@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I’m inclined to agree but you can their stance here: eff.org/…/beyond-platforms-private-censorship-par…
phillaholic@lemm.ee 1 year ago
I’m aware of their stance, and I disagree with it. Beyond that, it’s simply a different issue than Net Neutrality and they aren’t conflating the two. It’s important to understand the difference, especially because a large number of Americans have little to no choice in Internet Service Providers.
It’s a kin to the water company refusing to provide water to a racist on your street. That’s wrong. Water is a utility and should be available to the home owner regardless. However, Walmart should not be obligated to stock water that racist bottles with racist slogans on it in their stores.