On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 10:56 PM, John Mark Vandenberg jayvdb@gmail.com wrote:
Comparisons to PBS/TV are not a useful pro-Wikipedia Zero argument ...
Nor was it offered as a pro-Wikipedia Zero argument! It is instead an argument intended *specifically to underscore inconsistent standards of analysis.* It is, instead, specifically addressed to the specific complaint about interpreting banners as advertising. (Drilling down even further: I don't see the banners on Wikipedia at all. So necessarily the banners cannot be annoying to me.)
Since much of what you write is based on the misunderstanding that I was using PBS as a pro-Wikipedia-Zero argument, I'm passing over the misunderstanding without comment.
The larger issue: do we care more about Wikipedia's mission or more about preserving some absolutist application of net neutrality? I think Wikipedia's mission is more important, and you may disagree, which is fine.
As I said in the piece, I care about both. But I also know that an absolutely rigorous application of net neutrality--you know, the kind of invariant principle that hobbyists who never to try to fund anything themselves are prone to cook up--would require that emergency phone calls (think 911 in the USA or 999 in the UK, for example) be charged to the user.
Do you think emergency communications should be charged to the user by the bit, John? If not, how do you justify that departure from absolutist net-neutrality principles? And if you're not an absolutist about net neutrality, then why can't you allow for the possibility that access to Wikipedia may do more to help citizens of the developing world than absolutist net neutrality will help them?
If you are comfortable condemning the developing world to charging Wikipedia users for information by the bit for the indefinite future, then by all means insist on network neutrality without exceptions. (And certainly make sure that you enable all users to turn off expensive emergency communications!)
But I seem to recall something about Wikipedia's providing the world's information to everyone for free. The developing world needs to be able to do this via mobile providers, whose business model is to charge by the bit (or by the data plan). I don't recall elevating net neutrality as a principle above Wikipedia's mission.
--Mike