I have multiple citations there for starters, and clearly you didn't read any of them. > You've just made ad hominem attacks against me, and an assertion about

I have multiple citations there for starters, and clearly you didn't read any of them. > You've just made ad hominem attacks against me, and an assertion about what may happen in the future, with zero reasoning. Not at all, not only was the comment considerable I was even nice and included external sources for you to evaluate. In fact, one was the fact that without Net Neuatrality the internet is carved up, and that our current FCC chair thinks that's a hypothetical. Please, replying to comments on HN and showing that you didn't read my content or sources is in poor form, and you should stop that. This isn't a pretend situation, this is actually happening in countries that do not have these protections. > You sound like one of those anti-free speech types, exactly the people I don't want censoring the internet using the force of the state. Guess what Comcast, and any other ISP can do if we lose Net Neutrality? Remove your ability to post about anywhere on the internet. I'm defending that, you are not. So you're actually the anti-free speech person here right now. Literally! > Then you say this topic isn't even open to debate. It really isn't, let me explain that to you again: It really is not up for debate, the idea that "all bits are equal" is not up for debate. That's why I compared your poor point to an "anti-vaxer". Your point is toxic and dangerous to the current free and open internet. You want ISPs to be granted the ability to stamp out free speech and then attempt to tell me I'm against free speech? You've got a long way to go before you reach any sane argument point. I'll allow the HN voting system, my actual citations you've so conveniently ignored, and perhaps you'll actually read my comment instead. > Thanks for proving my point! I think the rest of HN, myself, and the internet have done a fantastic job of proving that no you don't actually have a point. So I'm not sure what you are celebrating here. I will not engage with you any further, and again I am absolutely terrified of anyone involved with Technology siding with the current FCC chair, as it shows deep ignorance that we must work to correct. > Get real. You're the one that needs to "get real". I will not engage in your trolling behavior any further, that last sentence pretty much confirmed you're not one to listen.