That's definitely not the point of net neutrality...have you read much about it?
That's definitely not the point of net neutrality...have you read much about it?
I wish people wouldn't twist and mangle this into looking like some example of the government trying to run our lives, they are protecting our equality and freedom on a vastly important medium that is on the brink of being radically changed by massive corporations
From Google's Blog:
"Network neutrality is a principle proposed for user access networks participating in the Internet that advocates no restrictions on content, sites, or platforms, on the kinds of equipment that may be attached, and on the modes of communication allowed, as well as communication that is not unreasonably degraded by other traffic."
Google Public Policy Blog: Net Neutrality
Or, we could stimulate competition in the marketplace, and they will do it on their own. FCC does not belong in this fight. Period.
The ends do not justify the means.
Honestly I don't think you can make a statement like that until you know what exactly the ends in question would be, and for that matter, the means as well
No it wouldn't stimulate competition because in many markets there is no competetion and no way for competition to enter those markets due to deals that the internet providers struck to develop those markets.Or, we could stimulate competition in the marketplace, and they will do it on their own. FCC does not belong in this fight. Period.
The ends do not justify the means.
Net Neutrality is more than what you quoted in the Google blog. More than anything else, it is equal access for everyone. Companies are already implementing plans that are on a "pay-for-bandwidth" model, which would stifle competition by putting undue expense on smaller businesses or individuals to continue the same level of internet traffic on their websites.
The very nature of the internet puts it squarely under the jurisdiction of the FCC, so a fundamental change in US policy would be required to give to to another department. The FTC could be possible, as it would be regulation of commerce, but the FCC would have final control, like it or not.
If the ends justify the means, then I assume everyone here agrees with the basic concept that is communism.
now you're just trying to take this offtopic
But my comparison does stand, does it not? The end, does not justify the means.
You are completely missing the point. Net neutrality and this ruling isn't about the FCC regulating the internet. It has everything to do with corporations regulating and controlling internet content and access...no matter if you have a contract with that corporation as your ISP or not.But you guys are completely missing my point. The FCC regulating the internet is the absolute last thing we need. It would be like if we put judges on the street to police you. There are boundaries, checks, and balances for a reason, and they all need to be respected. If the ends justify the means, then I assume everyone here agrees with the basic concept that is communism.
They FCC does NOT want to police the Internet, they want to police the companies that provide access to the Internet. This is a huge difference in what you're saying. They want to insure that the Internet stays free and open...what incentive does any ISP have to make sure this happens? None!
We've been tracking upcoming products and ranking the best tech since 2007. Thanks for trusting our opinion: we get rewarded through affiliate links that earn us a commission and we invite you to learn more about us.