6 ms·
A lot of people in these comments are making the case that removing net neutrality didn’t do much harm, so why bother bringing it back. Let me make the counterc
by cainxinth 3y ago
A lot of people in these comments are making the case that removing net neutrality didn’t do much harm, so why bother bringing it back. Let me make the counterclaim.
The argument against net neutrality is that it might stifle innovation. Well, we had net neutrality for many years and innovation didn’t seem all that stifled. Hence, what’s the harm in bringing it back?
- cltby 3y agoBecause we should have strong priors disfavoring regulation, and this is a stalking horse for yet more internet regulation.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- xwdv 3y agoThe harm is that it takes away resources from other important issues that require our focus right now.
- Keegs 3y agoI know you're kidding, but it surprises me how often I hear the idea that an organization the size of the FCC can't multitask.
- Tostino 3y agoEspecially when never bringing up what some of those more important things could be.
- IshKebab 3y agoYou didn't hear that idea. You heard the idea that the FCC doesn't have unlimited resources. Do you disagree with that? (For the record I don't agree that this is unimportant, but you're arguing against a straw man.)
- BeFlatXIII 3y agoHow many resources would be taken away from which issues?
- dahfizz 3y agoWe are tired of the fear mongering and propaganda. We have seen the internet work just fine with and without net neutrality - its a micro-optimization as far as I am concerned. Political capital is limited. Instead of wasting it rehashing this bandaid, why not campaign for something like municipal internet that would fundamentally solve the problems of ISPs?
- toyg 3y agoThat's a false dichotomy if I've ever seen one.
- dd36 3y agoI am going to repeat this in every chain: net neutrality is the law in California.
- dahfizz 3y agoVitally, net neutrality is an actual law in California. It can't be overturned arbitrarily by some bureaucrats. Since Congress won't do anything at the national level, this is going to be re-hashed out by the FCC every time the president's tie changes color.
- andrewla 3y agoWait -- I'm genuinely curious -- does that mean that data-throttling plans from mobile providers do not exist in California? All the plans I see (in New York) say things like "unlimited but video will be SD instead of HD" which seems a frank violation of the principle of net neutrality (not to mention a bit of a technical marvel). Are these plans legal in California, or is the California law not sufficiently specific to rein in this kind of thing?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- burkaman 3y agoAnd ISPs are treating it like it's the law in the whole country: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/17/att-will-count-hbo-max-toward-data-caps-blames-net-neutrality-law.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/17/att-will-count-hbo-max-towar... > The change will extend beyond California, since, AT&T said, “the Internet does not recognize state borders.”