I'm sure this will make him re-think his position, and convince anyone still on the fence of the righteousness of net-neutrality. Because nothing says civilized and rational like doxxing someone because you're butt-hurt. Nothing.
The ISPs are responsible for the internet as we know it. Those companies and people are the ones that created it out of nothing and turned it into an infrastructure capable of streaming HD movies as you run down the interstate in a car. They alone are the experts that know how to run their business and they alone have created the very internet service everyone is afraid of losing.
And all of the sudden, there are WAVES of people who think turning all of that advancement over to our federal government to operate is a good idea? In fear of a bunch of things that havent even happened yet?Please, critically think this through. Rather than relay the "big bad corperations are going to ruin our lives" message, consider the possibility that you're mistaken and the removing the government hand is actually allowing the internet to continue flourishing like it always has.
Pai is more of a hero of the free internet than a villain of it. Stop reading / regurgitating. Start critically thinking!
Nothing is being turned over to the government to run. It's just one regulation that the companies should abide by, and if they don't, they face punishment from the government.
If the feds are regulating and enforcing then they are controlling.
The corporations will be beholden to running themselves in a manner that the guy in charge of the FCC wants them to.
Most government power is implicit rather than direct.
The problem is that the goal of all companies is to make money. To help keep companies from exploiting their customers and maintain a certain level of ethical practice you need a form of oversight. The FCC is supposed to be this oversight. Cause believe me if the ISP companies think they can take your money they will "that's their entire point". Let's face it if you had to choose between no internet and paying for it you'd pay for it in fact we already do. The "problem" is that the people making governing decisions don't have a clue how the "Internet" works and refuse to listen to experts but instead take the word of those companies that only present part of the facts so that they can get their way and wait for it.... make more money.
But hey don't take my word for it. Go look at what those ISPs are doing in countries they have free reign in. Sure you can get the internet but you need to buy the streaming package to stream shows and movies from websites. And if you want to get the news well that's another package. Oh, and we'll just block your access to any and all websites that don't conform to how we play.
Indonesia doesn't have net neutrality and one of their isps has their own version of netflix and has blocked access to it so if you want to stream you can only use their ( very much more crappy) version
It's not a necessary sacrifice, though. It's just owners wanting to stuff their pockets even more.
Things like monitoring for keywords I understand cause that's trying to keep people safe, but the only reason they're trying to repeal it is for their financial gain.
The internet isn't something you can vote with your wallet, though. Certain grocery stores ? Yeah. There's usually another one near by. Most people can only get their internet from one provider because they take sections so they won't have competition. And it's now a necessity like electricity or water, you can't just not use it to make a point when you rely on it.
Other countries are not like the US. The reason so many people want to come to the US is because it still is,for now, the land of opportunity.
.
Companies dont need oversight unless monopolies are forming. Competition and opportunity provide the oversight. The greed of some billionaire willing to step in and fill the market void is exactly what will happen.
I would disagree that companies don't need oversight, but maybe I'm thinking differently than you. The Better Business Bureau exists simply because some companies have better ethics and business practices than others and they're willing to say hey these guys are bad news and these guys are fine. The White Collar division in the FBI wouldn't have a purpose if we could trust companies without the need for oversight. Con artists exist to exploit opportunities but we don't just accept them or their practices and any company willing to cross a line for profit can and will exploit what they can when they can. That's the nature of greed. There is a reason why completely unrestrained capitalism causes massive social issues. Do companies need some overlord/overseer to completely regulate everything they do? Probably not, but having someone in the position to create and enforce rules that everyone needs to play by if they want to do business is necessary.
I guess i should clarify. Of course i agree that we need law enforcement for illegal behavior including anti trust law. Consumers will be much better off if the government stays out of business decisions (how to charge for their services).
That'll work.
Congratulations, Ajit now has the moral high ground.
And all of the sudden, there are WAVES of people who think turning all of that advancement over to our federal government to operate is a good idea? In fear of a bunch of things that havent even happened yet?Please, critically think this through. Rather than relay the "big bad corperations are going to ruin our lives" message, consider the possibility that you're mistaken and the removing the government hand is actually allowing the internet to continue flourishing like it always has.
Pai is more of a hero of the free internet than a villain of it. Stop reading / regurgitating. Start critically thinking!
The corporations will be beholden to running themselves in a manner that the guy in charge of the FCC wants them to.
Most government power is implicit rather than direct.
Things like monitoring for keywords I understand cause that's trying to keep people safe, but the only reason they're trying to repeal it is for their financial gain.
The consumers don't like it? Vote with your wallets.
.
Companies dont need oversight unless monopolies are forming. Competition and opportunity provide the oversight. The greed of some billionaire willing to step in and fill the market void is exactly what will happen.