4 ms·
This is a very poor article that does nothing to provide any insight into network neutrality. That's not too surprising, though, since it's 7 years old. If the
by kevinpet 16y ago
This is a very poor article that does nothing to provide any insight into network neutrality. That's not too surprising, though, since it's 7 years old.
If the knee-jerk fans of benevolent government want to criticize their position, it would at least be appropriate to criticize their current position, such as found in this recent paper:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-626.pdf http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-626.pdf
- wtallis 16y agoSo, it looks like they now admit that neutrality is a good thing, but they say not to worry, because it's impractical for ISPs to actually discriminate. The documented cases of anti-p2p traffic shaping, large-scale deep packet inspection, and the eagerness of ISPs to secure their rights to do those things without even telling consumers all prove that the Cato Institute's analysis has not yet converged with reality.
- dnautics 16y ago...and the eagerness of the government to 'regulate' wikileaks out of existence proves that the statist's analysis will never converge with reality. Look, if ISP wants to fuck with packets, then all you have to do is encrypt them, on onion route them, or whatever. If you are being regulated by the government, though, you just might get a friendly knock on the door. Or maybe the government will raid you with a swat team. Hope you don't have any pet dogs.