Why should we wait until that happens to regulate it?
We shouldn't enact laws on something that's never happened. in fact the couple times it's been tried (vonage), it got smacked down by the FCC including fines, without the need for a net neutrality law. but you got to remember, "Net Neutrality" was more about obama overeaching his legislative power to give the FCC control of the internet like it was a railroad. (the idea is that once regulated as a utility, they can tax it).
Almost every example, people bring up, was not affected by the Net Neutrality rules and was more of a congestion issue. As you can see here, the concept of this issue is an ocean, and most people don't know how to swim, but strut like they do.
And of course, on the other side of the coin, now that we do have it, getting rid of it sends an opposite signal to ISPs: Go ahead and throttle. Work out new and exciting ways to use your monopoly power to rip off customers.
hypothetical, it's never really happened, other than a couple times that were smacked down by the FCC even without official "net neutrality rules".
Look at every attempt to do what "Net Neutrality" (obama's fake order that was really "make the isp's a utility rules), claims it would do, yet, it was done prior to the Net Neutrality rules.
https://www.freepress.net/blog/2017/04/25/net-neutrality-violations-brief-history
The barriers to entry in the high-speed access market are incredibly high, unlike back when everyone had dial-up modems that used telephone landlines, because the industries are treated differently under the FCC. In the vast majority of places there is one cable service provider, perhaps at most two. In fact, I've lived around the Boston area generally for 20ish years, and only once was I briefly in a place where I could get high-speed access from Comcast or RCN. Oh wait! RCN didn't connect to that particular building. There are few places where a bunch of competing high-speed access services all laid down their very expensive lines.
What does this have to do with net neutrality or even Net Neutrality? if a monopolized ISP in an area decided to affect traffic to profit itself unjustly, and they are a subsidized entity, sure, as have had happened in the past the FCC shut it down.
Competition is no bar to throttling in this market. Why signal that that is OK?
Obama's overeach of his executive power for one.
What's going on is simple. Trump's admin wants to kiss big business ass as much as possible. The admin also knows that the GOP has, with much success, duped it's base into thinking that any regulation is inherently bad. So it knows it can say "oh, net neutrality is harming business" and it's base will drool, nod, and bend over, because regulation bad.
But it was harming business, it created all sorts of red tape, beurocracy, and hoops to jump through, Net Neutrality, had little to do with actual "net neutrality". ISPS, can, do and should traffic shape and prioritize traffic based on overall performance.
What did obama's net neutrality do?
from the horses mouth:
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/node/323681
"A user creates a petition on the White House's We the People platform, petitioning the Obama administration to "Restore Net Neutrality By Directing the FCC to Classify Internet Providers as 'Common Carriers'." The petition went on to be signed by 105,572 users."
https://www.cnet.com/news/13-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-fccs-net-neutrality-regulation/
this is basically what obama's Net Neutrality was supposed to do. you note for something that never happened, that when attempted to happen, got shut down, the only thing new here, is the FCC's tangling web of beurocracy was added.
The Trump admin also knows that its base has been conditioned to think that all things liberal are bad. It knows that because of this, y take whatever position lies opsite what "liberals" appear to be saying. So here, if "liberals" seem to be saying Trump is saying it is bad, the base will just start making up BS to defend its automatic opposition to whatever the liberals are saying.
when you start saying "the trump base" and "have been conditioned", why cant the same be said about all these people in this thread who don't understand the issue, barking on and on like they do? the Net Neutrality rules are bad. they were a solution that wouldn't work for a problem that doesnt exist.
You can even see some of that in this thread. "[Oh, why is everyone saying this is bad but the Trump admin isn't explaining its action? I know! I suspect it must be that liberals who are saying this action is bad are just greedily gobbling up all the internets to my detriment! Down with net neutrality!]"
Just....BLECH
who said that?