Hacker News Reader

Net neutrality is likely to help Facebook more than it hurts them, because they can pay for access, which startups probably cannot. All the social companies FB bought (plus the one they couldn't, SnapChat), would have had a much harder time of it if they needed to pay a per-subscriber fee.

View on HN

This assumes that Facebook could afford to pay that cost, as ISPs know that Facebook is highly valuated, and that Facebook is willing to pay that cost, knowing that an ISP without access to Facebook is currently useless to the majority of their users.

You think people will use an ISP that Facebook says is forcing slower connections on people? I think you’re underestimating their market power.

You think people have a choice? There are many areas where consumers have to choose between one crappy ISP and other even crappier options (like satellite).

I think the vast majority does have a choice. I know about the places you are describing and they all have one common feature — not many people live there.

Why would FB want to shoulder an additional cost?

Because it's cheaper than out-innovating your competitors.

But I'm pretty sure FB still supports NN anyway, since a lot of the value to users of Facebook are the articles their friends link to, and that gets hurt if some links are more expensive for some people to click on.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com