My favorite are the ones who like to point out that the “government built the Internet” so it’s for everyone therefore Net Neutrality...and the government should enforce it.
What they don’t know - because they weren’t there - is that the Internet they know and love almost didn’t happen *because* of government. They didn’t like or want the TCP/IP stack because they considered it too cumbersome. It wasn’t until the foundation and idea was turned over to private enterprise that the TCP/IP stack flourished and grew and suddenly the *real* Internet was born - built on the backs, intellect, and *money* of private enterprise.
And at the time, the government had no use for it because they hated it and thought it worthless - so they paid no attention to it. Which allowed private enterprise to expand and grow the technology at amazing rates. All without government lifting a finger.
I’ve used this analogy before: Turning the owners of transport into common carriers would be akin to forcing Kroger to offer shelf space to Kraft and Hellman’s at cost just because Kroger sells their own brand of mayonnaise at a price point lower than the others because they own the shelf space and can take advantage of that. Kroger could - in fact - price their shelf space to the point where Kraft and Hellman’s would refuse to buy it - thus making their product the only one on the shelves. They don’t do it because there are other stores that offer their competitor’s products and if they eliminated their competition that way, their customers would begin leaving for those other stores...
Another thing the NN opponents fail to realize is that the costs for non-bandwidth-heavy content providers could actually go *down* if ISPs are no longer bound by regulation to charge everyone the same. Netflix may end up having to pay 10X the amount because they stream bandwidth-heavy media while a site like FR sees their costs reduced because they are nearly all text-based.
“Another thing the NN opponents fail to realize is that the costs for non-bandwidth-heavy content providers could actually go *down* if ISPs are no longer bound by regulation to charge everyone the same. Netflix may end up having to pay 10X the amount because they stream bandwidth-heavy media while a site like FR sees their costs reduced because they are nearly all text-based.”
Correct.
And the same applies to Youtube, Google and others who derive their revenue from those obnoxious ads that bounce all over your screen, and videos that pop up and detract from you’re trying to read.
The “free” content providers are freaking out over this. The net is no longer their own personal bitch, compelled to deliver any and every thing they serve up for free. While they extract ALL the revenue and profit from the ecosystem.