Comment on The FCC is Expected to Propose the Return of Net Neutrality Protections Oct 19th

• pickscrape@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  That argument is similar to the whole “platform N taking down content violates the 1st amendment” argument. It’s a non sequitur.

  source

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I’ll see if I can make it more sense for you:

    If you argue that the pathways that make up the internet should not be artifically restricted or gated as a means of shuttibg down competition, while at the same time turning around and shutting down your own public pathways, that’s a huge problem.

    source

    • Nougat@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Setting aside for the moment the fact that net neutrality has to do with IP traffic (layer 3, network) and not API availability (layer 7, application) --

      Reddit's API is not a "public pathway." It is a private gateway into the reddit environment. They can charge whatever they like for it, because it is a part of their application.

      The way they went about changing to their current fee model was undeniably shitty, and yeah, they're trying to prop up ahead of IPO. None of that has anything to do with net neutrality. You're wrong on this one, time to let it go.

      source

      • CosmicCleric@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Reddit’s API is not a “public pathway.” It is a private gateway into the reddit environment. They can charge whatever they like for it, because it is a part of their application.

        Not saying that you are wrong, legally, and not to relitigate the whole thing again, but if you offer a public facing API and then you later on just withdraw it (or its functionality) altogether, that’s something a business should not do to its customer base ever, for ethical and social contract reasons.

        The Internet is not just defined by legal systems, it started with ethical social contract systems. More nebulous than legal, yes, but still, Society does follow them and expects companies to do so as well.

        source
    • Stumblinbear@pawb.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      There’s a world of difference between the road itself and the people who own the cars.

      source
• hiddengoat@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Reddit is not a fucking ISP, now are they?

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality

  Learn before you make yourself look like an idiot.

  source

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    And, if you argue that an ISP shouldn’t be engaging in anti-competitive networking while at the same time (or in this case, a couple of years later) doing the same thing, that’s a huge problem.

    And make no mistake, what they did WAS anti-competitive. They wanted to shut down the 3rd party apps that put a magnifying glass on all the problems with the official reddit app just before a proposed IPO.

    source

    • RagingRobot@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      The difference is that reddit has no obligation to anyone to provide an API. Not every company has a public API. You have no guarantee to the right to see reddit content. it’s theirs. I don’t like that but it’s the reality. They weren’t obligated to build an API and they aren’t obligated to maintain one especially not for free. I would argue it’s in their best interest to do so but they don’t have to and that’s where we are.

      Net neutrality deals with the network though including the part reddit lives at.The things that every person does (or did) have a right to connect with if they choose to. The means for connection all together.

      source

      • CosmicCleric@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        The difference is that reddit has no legal obligation to anyone to provide an API.

        FTFY

        source
• gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Not sure if that holds

  They’re not stopping competition, they’re gatekeeping access to their system

  Competition is allowed still, for example, the site were using right now to communicate this very conversation

  source

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    They are stopping competition. They didn’t want superior 3rd party apps competing with their super shitty app just before a proposed IPO.

    source