[bcgraham]

Note that roads are not neutral in the “net neutrality” sense, since emergency vehicles are prioritized. There’s a cogent argument against net neutrality on similar grounds: i.e., prioritizing traffic with prioritized purpose, especially in the face of congestion.

[jeroenhd]

Networks aren't neutral either, even under net neutrality rules: you might lose your data uplink of the tower is at capacity and someone dials 911.

I'm a proponent of weakening net neutrality for when lives are at stake, but that's hardly ever the case on the internet. The problem is that most non-neutral treatment is the result of business interests rather than the greater good.

[username190]

In addition to what was noted by a sibling comment (emergency calls are given higher priority than your standard commercial voice or data traffic), there is specifically an exemption listed in California's Net Neutrality law [0] for emergency traffic.

> 3103. (a) Nothing in this title supersedes any obligation or authorization a fixed or mobile Internet service provider may have to address the needs of emergency communications or law enforcement, public safety, or national security authorities, consistent with or as permitted by applicable law, or limits the provider’s ability to do so.

[0] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml...

[zmgsabst]

In what way is “emergency vehicles need special access” similar to “we need to charge Netflix more because ISPs oversold their networks while failing to upgrade”?

[ThunderSizzle]

Toll roads charge more for larger vehicles. Vehicle registration may be more expensive for heavier vehicles or vehicles with more wheels. Meanwhile, toll roads may have just as much traffic issues and no guarantee of average velocity.

How is that not similar to ISPs throttling?

Not that I care much either way. I care more about localities and states encouraging or enforcing monopolies.

[nijave]

Also HOV, express lanes, toll roads, and other private roads