Does anyone here actually oppose Network Neutrality?

[AdamSK]

Usual Libertarian solution:get rid of Government and the problem will solve itself.

No, not at all. If there were only one ISP in my town and they were engaging in this behavior, much of my response would be municipal - lobbying the local governments to remove any regulatory capture of fiber or easements, working with community groups to get a change in the ISP's policies, attracting a competitor to the city.
Problems seldom solve themselves, but I do find that the best solutions tend to be local and based on the needs of particular customers being affected, rather than trying to administrate top-down at the federal level.
I'm not saying let the free market do everything; I'm saying the government intervention in this case should be requiring transparency and then encouraging ISP competition at the local level, rather than an easily-abused federal regulation.

 

[Upchurch]

Don't know if they do or not. Just saying it's transparency, not government regulation, that I think can best fix the potential abuse.

So idealistic.

Cost them a whole lot of money until they stop.

That is so adorably naive.

 

[Upchurch]

No, not at all. If there were only one ISP in my town and they were engaging in this behavior, much of my response would be municipal - lobbying the local governments to remove any regulatory capture of fiber or easements, working with community groups to get a change in the ISP's policies, attracting a competitor to the city.

And if all ISPs do it, what then?

I'm not saying let the free market do everything; I'm saying the government intervention in this case should be requiring transparency and then encouraging ISP competition at the local level, rather than an easily-abused federal regulation.

In the meantime, innovation is squashed and startups are trampled.

On the other hand, we could go with Network Neutrality and things continue to work as they do now.

 

[Upchurch]

Cost them a whole lot of money until they stop.

Wait, I gotta know. How are you going to cost an ISP "a whole lot of money"?

 

[lomiller]

I oppose the FCC setting NN policy. All I feel is needed is disclosure rules - if my ISP throttles my data, they have to report it to me on my bill.

You’re ISP may not even know your data is being throttled, in fact they almost certainly would not because they wouldn’t be the ones doing it.

 

[AdamSK]

And if all ISPs do it, what then?

If the ISPs phalanx up in the way you're describing, then I'd probably be behind FCC regs at that point. I don't think that's going to happen. It's not happening now.

In the meantime, innovation is squashed and startups are trampled.

Seems unlikely. Example?

On the other hand, we could go with Network Neutrality and things continue to work as they do now.

Can you give me a single example where a new FCC regulation has resulted in things continuing to work as they did before the reg?

 

[AdamSK]

That is so adorably naive.

No, that's experience. I've lived through local consumer-driven changes in phone service, electrical service, and cable service. Even national companies manage their services regionally; you can secure changes or invite competition if you know your local government and can mount some critical mass of consumers.

Like I said, this isn't a "libertarian" solution - it's a democratic one that leverages local government and local consumer groups in a way that is much more effective than a revision of national policy.

 

[lomiller]

I'm not saying let the free market do everything; I'm saying the government intervention in this case should be requiring transparency and then encouraging ISP competition at the local level, rather than an easily-abused federal regulation.

Again this has zero to do with ISP’s at the local level because that it’s where your data would get throttled. Net Neutrality governs the exchange of packets between the private networks that make up the internet.

The internet works because private networks like your ISP allows you to send and receive data between them, this means you can send or receive data from someone connected to a different private network than the one you pay too access. The other person or service likewise pays for access to the network (ISP, etc) that they are connected to.

What Net Neutrality does is prevent schemes where the other network throttles your data unless you are willing tom pay THEM in addition to the fees you already pay your own ISP.

 

[lomiller]

Seems unlikely. Example?

ISP are not targeting individual users at this point, they are targeting companies that operative on the internet. These companies already pay to connect to their own network, but your network wants to collect a fee from as well them or runs a competing service so they put a limit on how much data they allow that company to send to their network, which ultimately reduces the performance you see when you try to use that service.

Racially the big companies that can afford to pay the tax can still do ok, but for small startup companies than can’t pay the tax their service will not function properly.