ccrider_22 :
"If they can control bandwidth to favor their own content over competing content, they can also control bandwidth to favor what they want you to hear versus what they don't want you to hear. Don't let someone tell you that an ISP should be able to favor or handicap content just because he is on "your team", because in reality none of them are really on your team. This isn't about paying one's fair share or about innovation, it's strictly about the ISPs' ability to handicap and limit their content competition."
Well then fix that problem; don't hand control to a group of Nations that could completely change content allowed. That's like banning guns to rid us of idiots...
1. You don't understand the concept of "neutrality" very well do you?
2. You also don't understand that it's nation. Singular. Every country is individually responsible for NN, the reason the world is concerned with the US is because they're a huge traffic hub, and further, they set a lot of precedent internationally.It is not a delegation to international authority.
I wouldn't have a problem with people disagreeing with net neutrality, except not a single person thus far actually has shown an understanding of what it is through their commentary, because they have said things that are patent misunderstandings of the issue.... and so that's a problem. Condemn what you understand, but leave managing what you don't to the people who do - or learn, and then give an informed opinion.
Finally,
if you instantly scream socialism whenever the prospect of regulation comes up, you need to do some introspection. I've only ever known it as the calling card of close-minded contrarianism, and it's not good for debate, it's not a good way to form a worldview, and it's most certainly not indicative of a good, honest relationship with rationalism and evidence-based policy making. That's not good for society and if you want to gainfully participate in it, you should exercise some civic responsibility and make sure you're not just following people or being knee-jerk. It's the same sort of ignorant screeching the SJW's do, just without the free beatings. I love capitalism. It's a beautiful system, and the best we have. However, much like communism, the laissez-faire variety is predicated on an incredible naivety about human nature. The invisible hand is a hand - it doesn't have eyes, and sometimes so remains blind to major problems.There is a place for regulation in the system. This is one of them.
NN does nothing but prejudice ISPs who think they can double dip and arbitrarily charge more for the same unit on the basis of philosophy, not actual costs. Given that the internet is such an important gateway, and they have the privilege to be the gatekeepers, making such restrictions does not affect their bottom line. They already charge for delivery on a per unit basis.
It's like giving a truck (let us assume no special storage requirements were in place, as data is data - electrons do not differ in quality) driver a contract. He's to deliver 500 tons of goods. That's the contract. If you give him Iron or wood, he still agrees to transit 500 tons of it.
Now, it's awkward making this metaphor too realistic, as iron and wood have many different properties. Data however does not. It's always electrons, and if you're charging out on a unit basis, the pattern of those electrons does not affect costs, only the amount, which is being compensated for.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram