DISQUS

skywatcher · 3 years ago

I don't think regulation is required just because something might happen. I also don't think that consumers will allow their ISPs to significantly hamper their internet experience. If an ISP plays hardball and actually DOES slow a site like Google significantly, then consumers have the right to switch to a new provider. You could argue that there aren't many provider options in any given area, but that just means the already-established regulations that create the monopolies/duopolies should be lessened to allow greater competition. Competition and the free market, not over-regulation, is the key to maintaining network neutrality.

Johnny · 3 years ago

That would be a good argument but ISPs have already blocked numerous things. Do a little research and there are many examples where ISPs have overstepped their boundaries. So, this isn't an argument abuot what might happen, it's an argument about what is happening. Now some of my examples were what ifs but the fact remains that they have already gone too far. And if this starts happening, all ISPs will be in this new system. AT&T and Time Warner alone have put enough money into this that they will spend as much money as they need in order to get what they want.

fag · 3 years ago

nice spamming on digg, queerbate

Dustin Bachrach · 3 years ago

Sorry that would be Trace "Shawty" H... He's in my Comp Sci class. I appoligize for his insolence.

pkp646 · 3 years ago

Skywatcher makes some really good points. If these ISPs really did try and block or slow content they would lose business in a heart beat. The deal with net neutrality is that it is always better to keep the government out of it.

Stevens · 3 years ago

What is more to consider on this issue is that there has not been any cases of net neutrality being violated. It just isn't happening and it won't. Why should anyone want Congress to get invovled where there isn't a problem?

Dustin Bachrach · 3 years ago

These are all good points. My feeling is that despite AT&T;'s heavy lobbying, we won't see this sort of thing coming to reality. Although I think very little of these big business companies, they aren't that stupid. It's not comprehensible that a user won't see that google is taking forever to load and yahoo is not consistently. They will get pissed. This will only cause AT&T; bad press. Johnny has a point that we should contact our congressman immediately. If they aren't passing laws yet that doesn't mean you shouldn't inform your representatives of your stance. Stevens, why should congress not take preemptive action against this behavior? Let's set it in stone now that the net should be a free place.

hopeless · 3 years ago

"why should congress not take preemptive action against this behavior?"

beause by and large, legislators don't understand the internet as a medium or as an industry. because burdensome regulations could very well stymie the college kids working in thier basement on the next big thing.

Dustin Bachrach · 3 years ago

Hopeless,

Yes, legislators do not have a very wide experience with the Internet, but the regulation we are talking about will only help college kids and the like. Without laws to protect the equality of the Internet, we lose this fantastic resource. How is Net Neutrality a burden that will "very well stymie the college kids working in their basement on the next big thing?"

T-rav · 3 years ago

i just want to say for the record i wouldn't exactly consider time warner a telephone company, but i'll keep reading cause johnny sits behind me every day