I still need to learn what, exactly, does NET NEUTRALITY mean? That is an innocuous phrase , a contrived description that could mean anything.
I just want to know if the new label will increase the price for the same bandwidth, and if so, by how much? I also want to know if a customer says ‘no
, they do not want their history collected or their geographic location known, will we still have that choice, or has the choice of staying private always been an illusion?
It means that when regulated by the federal government it’ll be taxed and censored to death.
There would be no “neutrality” as a public utility when people who buy internet service are paying more to subsidize service for Holders’ people.
Here is my simple answer to a complex question you raise:
If Obama is in favor of it, I am against it. I don’t need any discussion. This POS is the anti anything I believe in.
Innocuous, noxious. It’s pretentious and mischievous, as much as it false, and deceiving.
My take: consider any of the big companies like At&T or Verizon. Currently they are expanding their footprints to attract customers - enter the government telling them they can’t recoop those costs by providing an extra boost in power to a large insurance company that wants to update all servers at night, or to accommodate a business that wants faster internet and are willing to pay extra for it. Now the gov tells them the ghetto rats get the same speed as that “willing to pay for it” private business. How much more expansion/updating do you think the provider is going to do in the future?
Think of it as in the same school of thought as income neutrality, that is all incomes the same.
The sixth law of thermodynamics mandates that for every expressed goal of progressivism, all related legislation enacted will result in the precise opposite of said goal.