Wade you said a mouth full.
Valeria Sowell

Nope, no hacking involved.

Without net neutrality protections, there’d be no hacking required as it would be legal to just do by paying for it.

My coco cola analogy was comparing a water utility to an internet provider.

Utilities have TITLE II protections that protect them from corporate shenanigans. We already have “water neutrality”, and “electricity neutrality”, and we want Net Neutrality to ensure that the internet is also protected from such shenanigans.

If Title II were rolled back from water utilities, then yes, CocaCola could pay local water utilities a sponsorship fee, and in return get their products sent directly to the users of that utility.

It’s the same as with net neutrality. If Google wanted to pay Comcast to make their products (YouTube, Google Play) the only ones with enough bandwidth for reliable video streaming, they would be allowed to do so. That means Comcast customers wouldn’t be able to stream via Netflix, Amazon, or iTunes. It’s the definition of anti-competitive practices, and the U.S. Government wants it to happen!!!

Because it would result in a flood of money to ISP’s, who have a very powerful lobby.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

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