I’m confused how your argument, which centers around a concern that there won’t be enough bandwidth…
Nicholas Kellerhals

It’s a little disingenuous of you to characterize my post as something that “defends the incumbent ISPs.”

Be that as it may, NetFlix watchers will always demand more and more bandwidth, but they’re pretty much taken care of anyway, because they are served by a system which, as I pointed out, would be illegal under a network neutrality scheme.

Network neutrality also does not incentivize the ISPs to invest in infrastructure, it does the opposite, in fact. So that argument doesn’t hold water.

I can’t support the use of a government cudgel to basically go after infrastructure providers with rules that violate basic network management practices that everyone uses, and at the same time forcing them to treat huge corporations that practice censorship exactly the same as small content providers that do no censor their users and content.

Access to high speed Internet (last mile) is a problem, and so is the issue of network access providers also acting as content providers. But this is the wrong approach to dealing with either of those issues. ISPs blocking content providers has never been an issue at all, only an imagined one.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.