I agree completely, but bigger companies are going to lobby against that. They’ll even give reasonable sounding reasons, such as switching costs or user safety.

I agree completely, but bigger companies are going to lobby against that. They’ll even give reasonable sounding reasons, such as switching costs or user safety. Their real reason though will probably be that the truly peer-to-peer networks enabled by a world free of NAT and symmetric bandwidth would undercut their precious market. Finally, I’m not sure our governments would like the rise of Anarchist networks where speech is so free they can’t even control it. See all the attempts to criminalise or put limits to encryption. Such things would never happen under democracy, but the representative governments we live under are a little different. (Historically, representative government was conceived in explicit opposition to democracy, and democracy lost.)