>>55095161
What's your opinion, Anon? Why not put some effort into your post?

Or are you just looking for someone to tell you what to think because you're too lazy to look at it yourself and make-up your own mind?

The FCC wants Net Neutrality or to make Internet access a utility because they don't have the ability to break up massive companies that abuse their position.

It's Plan B.

>>55095305
Yeah, but how much of it do you think is just regulatory capture? On the surface, it's marketed as pro-consumer or pro-the-little-guy, but in the end, you get what's expected out of rich n' powerful people limiting the power of other rich and powerful people: fucking over competition and putting shit in place to benefit you and your other powerful friends.

Is net neutrality really going to be any different, as pro-consumer as it looks?

>>55095305
If the government really cared, cities/towns would build their own fiber networks in their communities and would allow people to start their own small ISPs with the same fiber networks.

This would allow people to have either governement monopoly or a monopoly with just one or two cable companies.

>>55095357
>fucking over competition

That itself is the whole point of doing away with net neutrality - if you cant pay up your content is going slow (or getting cut).

>>55095424
>fucking over competition is the whole point of doing away with net neutrality

I'm a little confused. Can you clarify on what you meant?

>>55095489
The poorer content provider will send their content over the slow lanes or in the worst case will be blocked because they have no money to buy any bandwidth.

A neutral net treats all content equally - Netflix's videos go with the same priority as your amateur porn video torrent.

>>55095357
Large companies will throttle websites that don't pay them money. For example, Comcast used to throttle Netflix until Netflix started to pay them.