undefined | Better HN

0 pointsColinDabritz11y ago0 comments

The difference to me is that CDNs increase the availability of content to everyone. If CDNs did not exist, the content would still be available.

Comcast is talking about "not decreasing" the availability of content. Some businesses can afford to pay to use already-paid-for infrastructure. Others are out of luck, and their content is not fully accessible. If Comcast did not exist, current users would not be able to request content, but the market could provide a solution in an alternate ISP. With Comcast the market cannot provide a solution, because it is actively being suppressed by Comcast.

0 comments

Yardlink11y ago

There isn't really a difference between "increasing" and "not decreasing". Some of these debates have been about ISPs not investing in infrastructure when they otherwise might have.

The market can still provide a solution with the Comcast payments. That would be customers wanting fast everything don't use Comcast. If there's no competition for those customers then that's the real problem - a monopoly - not what tricks the monopoly uses to take advantage of people.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsColinDabritz11y ago0 comments

The difference to me is that CDNs increase the availability of content to everyone. If CDNs did not exist, the content would still be available.

0 comments

Yardlink11y ago

There isn't really a difference between "increasing" and "not decreasing". Some of these debates have been about ISPs not investing in infrastructure when they otherwise might have.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse