healywu:

tanya77:

ericmortensen:

Those conversations between Google and Verizon that both companies swore were not taking place were, of course, taking place. They’ve now jointly declared their desire to eliminate any prospects for net neutrality on wireless broadband. 

“Sixth, we both recognize that wireless broadband is different from the traditional wireline world, in part because the mobile marketplace is more competitive and changing rapidly. In recognition of the still-nascent nature of the wireless broadband marketplace, under this proposal we would not now apply most of the wireline principles to wireless, except for the transparency requirement.”

Read the whole statement.  Smoke and mirrors.

WE. ARE. FUCKED.

Tell 5 friends to sign up at savetheinternet.com to demand the government to DO THEIR FUCKING JOBS and not allow some corporation to dictate our regulations.

Once again, to play devil’s advocate…

On one hand, ‘Net Neutrality’ is wonderful and egalitarian.  Any piece of content, regardless of who it’s from or what’s its for, is afforded the same respect as any other.  The little guy is running across the same pipes as the big guy.  And if you want to use the Internet, nothing is going to stop you from using it your way.

There is a downside though;  with commoditization comes marginalization, and with government supervision comes stagnation.  Cable companies, the dominant high speed provider in the US, already have a nearly monopoly on the areas they service.  If  a young company wants to spend money laying fresh cable (and, to make money, enticing consumers with promises of faster Youtube and Google), isn’t it better for the consumer to have that choice?  

Government is not necessarily an innocent bystander, nor is it a perfect arbiter of consumer choice.  Any action the government takes is, necessarily, going to increase lobbying and corporate action in politics, because the government has decided the politics, not the marketplace, is going to be the arbiter of success.  If you want less corporate control of regulations, let the market, not connections to the powerful, decide how things should run.

Additionally, what assurance do we have that government is going to be the “good guy” anyway?  Modern governments love two things: information and control.  The internet offers limitless information with little government control.  Entrusting government to protect it’s lack of control is oxymoronic;  it’s the fox guarding the hen house.    

Corporations may not be any better, but there’s a perverse kind of honesty from a corporation (“WE WANT MONEY”) and you’ve still reserved the big stick of government for serious infractions.  

I’m not sure where I come down on Net Neutrality.  But I always feel the compulsion to point out, time and time again, that government is a bad solution to a tough problem.