Why do you keep providing in-accurate descriptions of Binge On and deliberately exclude the throttling that is central to both the current debate and T-mobile&#x27;s claims of &quot;UP TO 3X MORE VIDEO from your data plan&quot;?<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.eff.org&#x2F;deeplinks&#x2F;2016&#x2F;01&#x2F;eff-confirms-t-mobiles-bingeon-optimization-just-throttling-applies" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.eff.org&#x2F;deeplinks&#x2F;2016&#x2F;01&#x2F;eff-confirms-t-mobiles...</a><p>The opted-in throttling is especially dangerous for innovation on the internet because in one swoop it increases the difficulty of starting any service that depends on displaying high definition video on mobile. Not all high definition video is entertainment, so T-mobile has no way of knowing if &#x27;incredibly high resolution rates that are barely detectable by the human eye&#x27; are needed or not.<p>&gt; Its a clever solution to limited last-mile mobile connectivity.<p>No, it&#x27;s a slipshod and disingenuous solution to the limited last-mile mobile connectivity that violates Net Neutrality in two different ways: Zero Rating and content specific Throttling.<p>The value of Net Neutrality is open for debate, but T-Mobile is now flat out lying about their support of it:<p>&gt; T-Mobile is a company that absolutely supports Net Neutrality and we believe in an open and free Internet.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;newsroom.t-mobile.com&#x2F;issues-insights-blog&#x2F;open-letter-to-consumers-about-binge-on.htm" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;newsroom.t-mobile.com&#x2F;issues-insights-blog&#x2F;open-lett...</a><p>If T-mobile wanted to solve this problem while respecting Net Neutrality, they could have worked with content networks and other carriers to develop an open standard for marking video stream network data as amendable to throttling.