The FCC Wants to Eliminate Net Neutrality Protections. We Can't Let That Happen
eff.org
eff.org
This situation was more drastic than Microsoft's favoring of Internet Explorer back in the mid-90s, for two reasons - 1) It was much less transparent; 2) Most homes have only one broadband provider in their area, or at best, one relatively fast provider and one not so fast. The main barrier to entry seems to be the cost of deploying plant - a figure I heard a VP give was 1500 USD per home passed - not installed. Witness Google Fiber's retreat from the market.
So the argument of consumer choice, even assuming perfect information of a provider's offerings, rings a bit farcial at present.
The scenario mentioned earlier -- shaking down popular services under threat of throttling or blocking -- might be countered by acquisition -- say, Google (600B USD) buying AT&T (250B USD) -- but this assumes the telcos wouldn't successfully deploy anti-acquisition tactics, both financial and political.
Before you trash this as anti-telco propaganda, I understand that businesses, especially public companies, have a fudiciary duty to their shareholders, which one can reasonably interpret as doing everything in their power, in compliance with the law, to make money. That includes legal political maneuvers such as lobbying. It's up to consumers to make our voices heard, blah blah blah.
Another interesting twist in this problem is common carrier status. Does the current legal climate impose risks for moving to a different regime?
The real danger is creating an impenetrable barrier to entry. Most people wont want or need full bundle, and will settle for just Facebook/Snap and Wikipedia tiers, making it impossible for startups to reach these customers.
The startup costs to entering one of these tiers would be similar to creating your own TV network. Allowing monopolies to push their tax onto the market effectively kills the market.
My local, independent, ISP is fiercely in favor of it (and less than 1/3rd of the price of Comcast). As a consumer and technologist, I can see only benefits with regards to competition and freedom.
Net neutrality is the idea that no matter the content of a message sent over the internet it should be treated the same as any other message.
The equivalent for power/water utility service would be that you can use power/water for anything in your house and you will pay the same price per unit you consume.
Imagine if power/water companies were allowed to charge different prices for drinking water compared to dish washer water. Or your power company charges you a different rate for A/C than your refrigerator. That's power/water companies without neutrality.
Do you want an Internet provider charging you more for using your preferred streaming service over using their video streaming service? In a world without net neutrality that's what you will get. You will end up paying for the internet like we currently pay for cable channels. Websites will be packaged into bundles and if you want something from another bundle... To bad you have to buy the entire bundle.
Can't they already do this now? Imagine an ISP provides a browser or even a browser plugin as a part of their service and certain websites will not work properly unless you are using that particular browser.
Imagine they give discounts to customers that use preferred sites over other sites.
I don't think they can do much more than this with net neutrality and they, should they wish, already have the power to do so now. It seems like the reason they don't do this is because there isn't much motivation for them to do so, artificially restricting their services would cause them to lose money to providers that don't artificially restrict services.
seriously though, you can't say this without running afoul of the right-think.
I agree with your statement. And I think it's absurd to think that we'll get what we want from the market if we try to impose NN on the system.
I'm in favor of NN though, even still. because I believe it will lead us to a place where we have to build (or buy) the network for ourselves.
I suspect you won't understand what I just said, so I'll spell it out for it. You've just insulted your audience without providing any actual argument. You're not contributing; you're mouthing off to make yourself feel like a big man. Time to grow up.