Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc
pocketkangaroo and GregE,
Currently, Net Neutrality is a "principle"... and at a basic idea, it's great. Until the U.S. law makers have a go at it.
They want to make it a law/rule/regulation, which will allow networks to regulate the quality of service (speed & access) they "choose" to give you. Without changing the price (that's the benefit they say)
So, if a Christian ISP said they didn't like porn, they could block it and you would be fucked.
It also means the chance that different qualities of service, could regulate who you could talk/chat or contact online. So if I have a higher end personal package and someone has a regulated package, we may not be able to communicate without the lower end person paying a fee.
We already have laws on the books that regulate ISP's on how much they can/can't charge, if they can or can't limit access. The FCC adopted the 4 basic principles of net neutrality, not a law.. we already have those, to do what this does, and we don't need more twists to screw us over.
Several twisted versions of the law, all set to regulate us, have been shot down over the last several years.
|
What you just did was defend net neutrality. A Christian ISP couldn't block access under net neutrality. An ISP wouldn't be able to build tiered access with net neutrality. Currently the rules are sketchy and the FCC probably doesn't have the ability to stop this from happening.
I think you may have the things backwards.