3 ms·

I'm not even convinced that an end of net neutrality would be such a bad thing. Less bandwidth? What specific activity would be impaired by that? Wouldn't it ma

I'm not even convinced that an end of net neutrality would be such a bad thing. Less bandwidth? What specific activity would be impaired by that? Wouldn't it maybe even be a motivator to waste less of it to annoying advertisement? And the hackers of the world will simply come up with a new digital web solution - no doubts about that - wouldn't that be exciting and maybe even spare me the crappy consumerist parts? ig, fb, sc etc. and realistically a governance of web content and behaviour is overdue. I can't just run around outside and shout insults at random people, as well.

wellboy 9y ago
As far as I understand it's a slippery slope. Prioritized traffic just opens up the possibilities for a lot more controlling measures of the internet. Power corrupts, so it's just a matter of that of this being abused by people in power.
emiliobumachar 9y ago
Less web startups, less innovation. Sorry, I can't be more specific about the future. But I can be about the past: Google probably would not have taken over search with its better ranking if AltaVista could just buy being much faster. Social networks probably would not have overtaken Orkut (culminating in Facebook after may interactions) if Orkut could just buy being much faster. Reddit (and Hacker News), if slow as molasses, might have lost to traditionally curated news sites (this one is a stretch). Stripe wouldn't seriously compete with PayPal if it was much slower when it was starting. So, what giants of the future will we be drowning on birth tomorrow? Specifically? No clue. But I'm very confident that they exist.