On the website side of things, though, you have a competitive market for internet services. The impression I've gotten is that the net neutrality debate has been focusing on the consumer end, not the server end, because there is typically only one or two choices for consumers for broadband internet access.

On the website side of things, if you don't like the rules of your hosting provider, you can choose from hundreds of alternatives. Hence, there is much less need for regulation.

For home wireless access, there are usually more choices than for home wired access, with at least 4 choices available in most decently populated areas. With 4+ choices, plus open platforms that make it easier to switch carriers, we may not need heavy regulation--the market might be adequate.

For home wired, an open system like Linux makes no difference for two reasons:

1. As I noticed, not many use it, so even if Linux somehow made it easier to switch wired providers, it would not have much effect, and

2. Linux doesn't make it easier to switch wired providers. If you are on, say, Comcast, and decide to switch to DSL, you aren't going to have an easier time on Linux compared to those on Windows or Mac.