Being concerned about a theoretical possibility of something happening is not the same as it actually happening and being a viable competitor.
> A competitor with a different culture could be a good thing.
Maybe. But I don't see any right now with even tiny amount of viability. Do you?
NN, as I understand it, is not so much about the current state of things, but about making sure that future "wikipedias" and "facebooks" get the same chances as the current ones. Right now there are no viable alternatives (that you and I know of, at least) - but what about this time next year?
You can't change what NN means on a whim, to account for whether each specific type of internet service has "viable alternatives" or not. And how do you even define what are viable alternatives? What's viable for me, might not be viable for others.
> You can't change what NN means on a whim
I don't want to change what NN means. I want to emphasize that NN means that people in Iraq who now can have access to a snapshot of the world's knowledge absolutely free wouldn't have that option anymore. In service of some abstract idea of fairness that doesn't even apply to anything specific. I don't think it is a good idea.
Not free. The costs are being covered by increased pricing on the rest of their phone usage.