Are you pushing that garbage?
And good morning! I thought I was the only one who woke up in the middle of the night (it's now about 4:15 AM here ... :-) ...).
But, in regards to Net Neutrality, I see it as keeping "freedom of speech" on the Internet, intact and not interfered with.
Some have considered it as a way to prevent some companies from legitimately billing for "bandwidth" but that's not the problem. Any company can bill for whatever amount of money that they want to charge for bandwidth that the customer uses. With my ISP, it's billed in increments, stepping up to higher and higher bandwidth (about four levels) and that's fine and we're not talking about any "regulation" of prices or bandwidth amounts or whatever to charge for that. So, that's not the issue for me.
But, the issue is the blocking of services on the Internet, instead of letting all services go out, regardless of content. There are "content filters" at some companies to block certain services, or else, to "clamp down" (on speed related to that service).
I'm saying, "Let all services go through, regardless of the type of service, or what the packet is or the information contained in the packet." Just charge for the bandwidth used... that's all.
That's the "freedom of speech" on the Internet that I'm talking about.
Turns out you’re noting but a big government statist yourself. No wonder you love that bitch.