> ISPs would de facto be discriminating based on gender, even when it is not explicit.
is discrimination based on preference a real thing that the law can protect you against? my understanding is that you cannot discriminate against things a person has little control over (race, gender, etc.)
i imagine you'd have to prove that preference discrimination was being used specifically as a proxy for the others to have any legal footing and it's a steep hill to climb because some preferences can be more expensive to deliver than others, too.
> some preferences can be more expensive to deliver than others
I don't think that a kb of facebook is significantly more costly to deliver than a kb of github.
ISPs bill by kbs consumed or a flat rate according to bandwidth availability. In the second case, even if some consumer groups use more bandwidth, it is not consumer's fault. ISPs sell you some capacity, but they underprovision and are therefore affected by total consumption. Without underprovisioning, costs should be out of the equation.
However I agree with you that this point is hard to argue in court.
is discrimination based on preference a real thing that the law can protect you against? my understanding is that you cannot discriminate against things a person has little control over (race, gender, etc.)
i imagine you'd have to prove that preference discrimination was being used specifically as a proxy for the others to have any legal footing and it's a steep hill to climb because some preferences can be more expensive to deliver than others, too.