3 ms·
I think Net Neutrality is bad for consumers, because it entrenches dependance on eg. Comcast. Instead, if we'd just let Comcast do whatever it wants with its ne
by mr_spothawk 10y ago
I think Net Neutrality is bad for consumers, because it entrenches dependance on eg. Comcast. Instead, if we'd just let Comcast do whatever it wants with its networks (yes, we have stupidly built a lot of laws/rules around network sharing, that enable nasty behavior by Comcast, et. al.), then they'd jack up the price for whatever they want and (in a handwaving way) we'd have a market for citizen built mesh-networks.
Those are great things.
as a further stretch of the imagination... Fuck Video Bandwidth... why are we encouraging more Netflix with Net Neutrality? Do we really want more television?
Fuck codifying anything about Comcast's business into legal frameworks (laws/regulations/etc...)... let's do what humans have done for many many thousands of years, and communicate among ourselves, instead of through the king's network.
And, to be sure, Comcast is King. Well, money is... Or we wouldn't be worried about FCC chair change-over.
/rant
[ edit - thanks for the down votes ]
- Spivak 10y agoSo what you're arguing is that NN is artificially keeping the cost of network access down? That's actually an argument I haven't heard before. Thus the only companies that can afford to eat the cost of NN are huge ISPs. I don't know whether this is true or not but I'm at least interested. NN is largely independent of the type of content being sent over the network. NN helps Netflix because they're in competition with services that are owned by or partner with ISPs -- it doesn't, on the surface, seem to foster the creation of more streaming services. Comcast was extremely anti-NN because they want to push cable and their own streaming services via network restrictions. I'm not sure what part of CC's business is begin codified into NN regulations or what nasty behavior it enables.
- thenomad 10y agoDo we really want more television? Do we really want more of one of the most vibrant artistic media right now? Do we want them pushing new boundaries in the way they tell stories? Do we want them bringing delight to more people - and more diverse groups who were previously ignored by network television? Erm, yes. I know it's fashionable amongst certain filter bubbles to be snippy about TV (and sometimes about all forms of entertainment), but actually, it's a pretty remarkable time for the artform. Many of those of us who are in favour of art, stories, beauty, reflection of humanity in the mirror of fiction, all that stuff, do indeed want more of it.