It might also have dwindled because there actually has been meaningful and in my eyes good legislation introduced. Both the EU net neutrality proposition and th

It might also have dwindled because there actually has been meaningful and in my eyes good legislation introduced. Both the EU net neutrality proposition and the California one is very similar and very reasonable imo. I might be in minority around here but I am not for hard line net neutrality - which to me is when you don't think any different kinds of nets / qos can exist. As far as I understand both the laws I referenced earlier makes it possible for an ISP to sell different QoS and innovate on that axis. What the laws forbid is for them to provide that service in a non-competitative way. So they have to offer that option to everyone and in a open way. This to me is the real problem and why net neutrality becomes a necessity in some cases if this is not followed (behaviors like throttling specific sites while boosting own sites for example).