ProblemChild wrote:
Bumping an old topic but hopefully someone will help out...
Can someone please explain why 2nd question OA is D? My view: the net neutrality means the ISP is not allowed to do bandwidth balancing by favouring one content over the other. How could the proponents than be for placing limits on bandwidth?
thanks!
The key thing to realize here is that supporters of net neutrality do not want network operators to dictate terms to content providers. Look at the last two sentences of the first paragraph: In order to manage the limited amount of available bandwidth, an operator might slow down a site that uses "too much" bandwidth. Proponents of net neutrality believe that this is unfair, and that limiting bandwidth can be accomplished on the user side, as is done in Australia, without directly punishing the provider.
You saw, correctly, that the first sentence reveals that net neutrality supporters do not want operators to be able to limit available bandwidth. But the seconds sentence reveals that they believe that limiting bandwidth can be achieved in another way:limiting bandwidth can be accomplished on the user side... So they aren't opposed to limited bandwidth, per se, they're just opposed to operators doing the limiting. Apparently, so long as limited bandwidth is imposed on the user side, they're fine with it.