Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc
No, I'm sure they have lots of reasons.. Are you saying Google has no reason "but to be a good guy to you?" .. hahahaha...
|
Not at all. But they have a lot to lose in this, just as all of us do. In fact, they would be the ones hurt the most based on their business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc
You keep ignoring the facts that ISP's aren't doing this, and the ones that do get flamed quickly, sued, ect.. "which is how it should happen".... If you add in regulation for this, more WILL follow.
And if they want to pay entry fee's, let them.. If nobody pays, they go out of business. If it works, Companies grow.
How it should work... oh, snap.
|
You are ignoring the facts that the laws are real fuzzy regarding this right now. Some say they can be sued for it, some say they can't. Most ISPs are arguing right now that net neutrality doesn't apply to them based on the current set of rules. Net neutrality is simply putting it cut and dry on paper so there is no longer any confusion.
So what is your position on this? Earlier you stated that it would be bad if ISPs blocked websites, then you said it should happen because of the free market. Then you said that everything is fine because these laws are already in place (despite just about everyone thinking otherwise), but don't want it to be solidified. What is your stance on this? Do you believe the ISPs should be able to prioritize traffic or that it should treated the same?