I read it. In a wireless world where service provisioning is not constrained by physical infrastructure then perhaps net neutrality laws are not as necessary because there is a relatively easy method to switch, but a 1yr test run does not 'prove' that as the author declares. Net Neutrality is needed. Does it need a law to enforce it? Maybe not. but we are way too early into the internet age to foresee if throttling/blocking becomes a thing and how throttling/blocking might impact the market. But requiring net neutrality by law, is not this onerous thing that is going to prohibit or even inhibit innovation either. Verizon didn't start or stop their plans for 5G based on what may or may not happen with NetNeutrality. I would also suggest that many of these providers are slow walking their throttling efforts and coloring within the lines so that they can appease the NetNeutrality crowd and forestall regulation. I haven't seen or heard of negative outcomes yet, so I would put this one in the TBD column for now.
Throttling has never been an issue. I think the one instance of it was Comcast and the issue was found and resolved with no Net Neutrality law. Why right laws to resolve issues that don't exist?
Here’s my rehash that I say all the time to liberals: - private companies do make mistakes or even break the law, yet they get caught and are punished for it - government or gov enterprises (read Medicare, Fannie Mae or whatever) have fraudulent practices that go on forever that never get corrected (Medicare fraud for example) Which one gets the headlines (the former)? Which one is worse in terms of $ (the latter)? Never had a liberal dispute this.
Monahorns and Stampede, Thanks for the insight. I posted the article without comment because I'm mostly an idiot about these types of tech issues and I had hoped it would spark further reaction from people more knowledgeable than I. Before you two jumped in I was working only with the amazing wit displayed by LongestHorn and I wasn't entirely sure if I should change my entire point of view based on his pithy commentary.
Private companies frequently break the law and often go unpunished when they do, and they pay defense counsels a lot of money and donate a lot to politicians to ensure that they go unpunished. I'm not saying they never get punished. I'm saying that it's far from a certainty, and when they are, it usually comes after a lengthy and expensive battle. This is very true, but the biggest problem isn't true fraud (though there's plenty of that). It's poor design and a refusal to accept realities. The business when caught gets the headlines. The government screw ups are far more consequential.
Mona Amazing and unknown. Thanks for finding this. There is some good to everything being more open and transparent now.
