Steven's analogy to the postal service is the most apt in this video. Just so people know (because the fake news made it seem like this was true): You won't have to pay more than you already do to use the internet. They claim that this is mainly to keep big evil corporations” from controlling the websites and content that you access.
According to Commissioner 'Rielly —one of the few people who's actually read the order—there is not a shred of evidence in the order that any aspect of this structure is necessary.” The record leading up to last week's vote contained evidence of only five instances in the history of the internet where ISPs may have thwarted content providers' access to end-users, none of which required heavy-handed net neutrality rules to address.
The people who are REALLY going to be hurt the most are the small companies trying to self host or start new data centers. Net Neutrality is a nice sounding term for government control. A range of state and local fees apply only to common-carrier telecommunications services—which is what the FCC just made your broadband internet service.
The majority of the USA only has access to one ISPs, and ISPs already charge various fees for no reason, and nobody likes it, yet they can still do it because there's no reason for them not to, and the same will be true with throttling if the non-net neutral internet regulations pass through congress.
Companies like Comcast don't have to worry that their users will simply select from another ISP that is still offering an open internet. This should be about the American people wanting a free and open internet versus the ISP lobbyists who just want to line their pockets, not left vs right.
Don't act as if AT&T charging for facetime is the only incident that occurred in regards to ISPs not being neutral on the net. This isp went out and got contracts with the big gaming companies like steam and blizzard and now they offer internet service where most of their server capacity or "pipe" is dedicated to these types of connections.
How does repealing this regulation help the general public not being forced by isp' s to pay for access to specific websites or social media platforms. Even some of the ISPs admitted to investors that net neutrality didn't really harm the ISP business. It may also make it harder for the next generation of online services to compete, if they have to pay up to be placed in a so-called internet fast lane.
Don't fuck with my good internet I don't want to have to pay 124$ just for good internet to watch youtube look things up and play video games. The Government can't do whatever they want, but I agree with Net Neutrality because repealing it is a way to make companies big bucks that's all.
Why aren't people holding up open access signs not FCC controlled "neutrality" magically the FCC created the neutral net and ISPs pulled will watch south park episode how to tame a horse in minecraft. That's because Ben's video didn't tell us why a free market works without competition.
Your side literally complains about big companies like Google doing unethical shit all the time. That ISPs use 'we don't throttle your connection' as a means to introduce competition. However, he believes the heavy-handed” Steven Crowder Net Neutrality net neutrality rules were never needed, aren't helping people as intended, and are in fact doing the reverse.
If you got rid of the monopoly of isps you could get rid of net neutrality but as it stands there will be many customers who will get sites and services blocked or slowed down and have no alternative. So any future attempts at people control will be negated by everyone and anyone manufacturing their own without government interference.