You admitted that everyone using the library would increase costs to the library.
Your math and memory are both failing you. I said: “They lose my subscription fee but the library does not have to pay the difference in excess of their costs.”
That’s the same for everyone. If 1000 people cancel their $40/month subscriptions and go to the library, the library costs do not increase by $40,000/month to offset the loss, even if you forgot that library consumption per person is less than always-online domestic usage per person.
W.r.t your memory failure, I said I alone do not increase the library costs. Conflating /myself/ with /everyone/ neglects the math above.
You don’t understand how the Internet works.
The ability for intermediary networks to interfere with Internet traffic isn’t bogus. That is why the FSF has and is fighting for it.
FSF is not in the slightest worried about Lemmy being throttled below 56k. If they were, it would indicate inability to understand how business works. FSF is fighting for reasons you don’t understand if you think the concern is throttling Lemmy below analog modem speeds.
Companies do not act as idealized politically neutral agents. For example right wing media has distorted news reporting because it is what the owner wants despite the loss in profit from alienating part of their customers.
You should really avoid analogies.
A tier 1 network can now restrict content both for profit (a competitor pays the tier 1’s to shut down the competition) or simply because the owner wants it despite the lost profits.
Tier 1 is too far up the supply chain to have the effect that you think it does. The netneutrality battle matters most to consumers on the last mile of transmission lines which determines the contracts. Worrying about tier 1 is like worrying about what is happening in Guatamala or El Salvador when you buy coffee on the world market, while ignoring the local market. But in any case, if your flawed understanding of how the Internet works leaves you fixated on tier 1 and you want to focus on that, boycotting is still the best move if you have the will power to walk. Boycotting the retail end of the transaction also boycotts tier 1, even if you hypthetically watch Netflix all day at the library instead of at home because the consolidation still yields less oversold unused bandwidth, less fat, and less revenue for the industry.
Your claim that your littering causes absolutely no social cost is absurd.
Yet you fail to support your claim that my use of the library has driven up the library’s cost for their flat rate contract. Your absurd litter analogy failed you because you failed to realise that consolidation of work reduces the work, reduces the infrastructure needed, and reduces the revenue it brings.