I don't know either which is the way to maintain what we've had for the last 25 years. I'm really not all excited by yet more regulations from the government, as they tend to give companies feet of lead, rather than the fleet afoot that we've experienced in the tech sector, nor do I like the idea of a tiered delivery performance system, in effect a balkanization of the Internet (although if you think about it, how often you see an @aol.com email address and think of A-O Loser! - but that's different I think).
We also have to acknowledge the good deeds from companies such as ComCast, AT&T, etc., in putting the current and extensive data pluming into place. Without their investments over the years in building out the Internet from major backbone links to the last mile and making it available to the general public at a reasonable price, we'd still be have an Internet of academicians trading insults with each other, rather than the information super highway that we have today on which you can purchase any number of things and conduct any number of business transactions (and yes participate in virtual communities such as this), and we should continue to have in the future.
Nancy Pelosi said: “We have to pass it, to find out what’s in it.” A Doctor called to a radio show & said: "That's the definition of a stool sample"
"Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket," Barack Obama January 2008
Trust is such a nebulous thing, isn't it? It's so fleeting, and once lost, very difficult to get back.! Business can be counted on doing what's best for their bottom line and their shareholders, and government can be counted on doing what's best for them to hold on to and enlarge their authority over all of us. Neither side cares what the people think as they watch the drama unfolding.
For my part, I'd rather side with business for several reasons. 1) The consumer can negotiate with a business - if rates get too far out of line, or their service starts getting sloppy, you can complain and threaten to go with someone else. They don't like to lose customers so something can always be offered to keep you happy. With the government, if their regulations and bright ideas get too absurd, that's just too bad. Follow the law is what you're told to do! You have nobody to complain to, except perhaps your congress-critter, but they have already exempted themselves from whatever it is that's bugging you, so they could care less, except at election time.
2) Businesses create jobs and anyone who is not productive won't last long, because business is competitive, especially since we've become a global economy. Government doesn't have that worry... they can hire as many people as they wish, which tends to happen every time they make a new rule, or new law. Somebody has to shuffle all those damn papers around that have been created, and you certainly don't dare to ask existing personnel to take on additional work! They already feel they're overworked, and the unions might get involved.
Bottom line - taxpayers already know they're going to end up the losers whichever decision is reached, but they would be interested in knowing why this topic is under consideration NOW! Free speech and exchange of ideas seems to be a problem lately for some - not how fast the internet can work, or whatever. We may indeed be as stupid as government seems to think we are, but maybe not!
The fact that you think net neutrality means "change" when it's been what has actually been around for 25+ years is just laughable.
I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK
Not liking the idea of government involvement isn't a position, it's just a place where many of your positions just happen to stem from. In the discussion of net neutrality, however, the belief against government involvement doesn't work, especially as in this case that particular involvement has demonstrated itself to be necessary and good.
The unbridled hackery on the part of a few of the conservatives (and one so-called independent) on this thread is absolutely astounding.
Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism.