I guess I don't see what encryption has to do with the topic at hand then, since they'd ostensibly only allow access to a known set of addresses with this plan.
If everyone used VPNs as a matter of course, it would prevent the oligopoly last-mile ISPs like Sprint and Verizon from having the power to implement anti-net-neutrality plans like this in the first place. It would be a much healthier state for the industry as a whole.
> If everyone used VPNs as a matter of course, it would prevent the oligopoly last-mile ISPs like Sprint and Verizon from having the power to implement anti-net-neutrality plans like this in the first place.
How? To use a VPN you have to be able to connect to your VPN server. If you have a service plan that only allows connections to IP addresses that belong to Twitter and Facebook, I don't see how you are going to use your VPN to connect elsewhere.
The point being made is that if everyone connected to the internet through their own personal VPN, either by educating everyone to do so, or some default system built into the infrastructure, then there would be no such thing as limiting you to a certain websites, because your ISP would never know what websites you, or anyone, was browsing. The only thing an ISP could see is bandwidth to/from your IP address, nothing else.
I think it's a pointless argument though. It's too late to set a system like that up now. The average consumer does not know what a VPN is, does not want to learn what a VPN is, and does not want extra steps in setting anything up on their phone or home internet. And what's the other option? Call AT&T and convince them to pipe everyone's internet to a random VPN not owned by AT&T before sending the traffic out elsewhere? It can never happen.
They don't need to see exactly what you are doing on Facebook, they just need to know you are going to Facebook so they can make Facebook pay for the traffic (in addition to you paying for the traffic, and Facebook paying their own data provider for the traffic). This is what a VPN solves but regular HTTPS/SSL does not.
How Facebook pays for the traffic (to your ISP, not theirs) is somewhat irrelevant (maybe they are a willing participant and sponsoring it), but ultimately as long as the last-mile ISPs know where the traffic is going to/from they know the two parties they can double dip from.