Hacker News Reader

Comment by vuln | Hacker News Reader

I for one cannot wait for the American Facebook user to actually sit down and consider whether they pay their ISP $10 a month to be force fed ads in their time line now throughout all videos and the finally put down the 'free' drug that Facebook has become.

Edit: Not just Facebook but social media as a whole.

View on HN

$10 a month? Perhaps you missed a 0 there... Americans pay a lot more per month to watch ads on the Internet.

I think the comment was a jab at net neutrality (or our newfound lack thereof).

The problem is though: Facebook is so big, they will pay every ISP in the country to be apart of the "free basics" package. The've even already done this in India and other developing nations around the world with https://internet.org. This will be free, or the lowest cost internet plan. So with net neutrality gone, Facebook has it easier, not harder.

I am confused by this comment. You pay ISPs for connection to content providers (assuming net neutrality). It is normal to expect people to pay the content providers for the content itself either directly or through watching ads. You can argue (and I would agree) that some content is not worth it, but this is not ISP related (again assuming net neutrality).

The comment is that you can no longer assume net neutrality. Under the assumption that your ISP does the equivalent of bundling television channels, you'd have end users look at their "package options" and go "no, of course I won't pay you an extra 10$/mo for Facebook with ads". GP is looking forward to the Schadenfreude.

It didn't happen with TV so I'm not sure the schadenfreude will really take effect.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com