Originally posted by dolphinfan
Its a matter of open competition. If a service provider is blocking traffic and denying your ability to use the net in the manner in which you
choose, you can switch providers to one that does not do that.
That is a common and flawed argument.
Not all people have the luxury of switching providers. Contracts, cancellation fees, installation and activation fees, hardware fees, etc., make it
hard and expensive to switch. There are some small cities that only have access to one or two service providers, and some people have no choice which
one to choose.
Allowing corporations (service providers) to discriminate data and websites is a HUGE MISTAKE and should be opposed immediately. It will allow them
to crush and destroy the competitive market
on the internet for their own behalf, and threaten the very existence of the internet. There will
be nothing stopping any service providers from blocking content. It doesn't guarantee a 100% free and open internet from anyone.
Originally posted by dolphinfan
Providers will promote open policies and it will become a competetive advantage. To the extent that there is insufficient flexibility in the
provider market, it will create opportunity for new firms to enter and disrupt the market.
The internet is already open..... What you are suggesting is allowing corporations to close parts of the internet so they can sell you and or charge
you extra to open the internet back up. That is outright madness.
If we already have an open internet, why allow corporations to close parts of the internet just so they can compete to open it back up? That is wrong
on many levels.
Originally posted by dolphinfan
What this current regulation would do is strip out that free market component of what is a huge marketplace and one that is already dominated by only
a few players.
What Net Neutrality would do is prevent corporations from closing the internet and selling it back to you piece by piece. It will prevent
corporations from killing the free market
on the internet.
Allowing corporations to block it's competitors will destroy the open and free markets on the internet. For example, Verizon (service provider) and
Google (search engine) are now partners. If you allow Verizon to discriminate content, nothing would stop them from blocking Yahoo, Bing, or any
other future search engine that may compete with Google. This closes the doors to the search engine market completely, and any new innovative search
engine will not stand a chance against the already established giants like Google. This completely murders the internet as we know it.
It wouldn't stop with search engines either. Next thing that could happen is online stores (Amazon.com for example) will partner with service
providers (Verizon for example), and nothing would stop Verizon from blocking access to all other competitive online stores. Future stores created by
John Doe in his garage won't stand a chance against the giants, because nobody will be able to visit their online stores.
What you and the corporations are favoring is a service provider market bubble. You are willing to destroy the established free internet market that
any John Doe in his garage can participate in, in favor for a tiny service provider bubble that would take millions of dollars and huge investments to
participate in. That is highly illogical and is a step BACKWARDS for the internet.
Originally posted by dolphinfan
The market would work. It might take a bit of time to work, but eventually it would work.
I can't disagree with you more. You are favoring the destruction of the free internet market just to chase another uncertain market bubble which
only a few could ever imagine competing in.
Originally posted by dolphinfan
The government's meddling in the commercial space of the providers will never stop and will only get more intrusive and drive more artificial costs
into the market.
The corporations meddling with the internet will never stop and will only get more intrusive and drive more internet services, businesses, and
websites out of the market.
Net Neutrality is the only hope we have to save the internet. It's one of the few occasions the government will ever be useful. The government
doesn't even need to be intrusive to enforce it either if customers report corporations blocking their open internet.
Originally posted by dolphinfan
The government madates regarding app usage and history will only get more expansive, never less. In order to perform the regulation, by definition
the government will need to collect usage data and will require that it be broken down, first regionally, then demographically and then down to the
individual in the guise of seeking to understand the usage and hence tailor the regulations to enhance web usage for everyone.
That is not entirely true. The government doesn't need to monitor anything, or collect any usage data at all. If the internet is to remain open and
free, the only thing the government needs to do to enforce an open and free internet is investigate complaints about blocked access by customers.
That is what your OP is about, they are encouraging the creation of applications that customers can use to determine if their service provider is not
following the law. There is no need for the government to be a middle man.
Originally posted by dolphinfan
As in the cases with phone records and existing isp controls, all of that data will be subject to a warrantless search by the government. Indeed they
may in fact hold the information making such a protocol as a search warrant meaningless.
I don't think that is true either. There is no reason at all for them to keep phone records, or data records, or do any searches without warrants.
For example, if I try to access AboveTopSecret, but Verizon blocked AboveTopSecret and or forwarded me to a Verizon sponsored conspiracy forum, I
should be able to file a complaint with the FCC, and they should investigate it. They don't need anything from me, they just need to contact
Verizon and figure out why I can't visit ATS. If that means doing tests on their service to see if access to ATS is available, that doesn't require
any warrants. You can do that from your home computer or mobile phone externally with an application (which your OP is suggesting should be
created).
Originally posted by dolphinfan
Far better to have certain web functionality disrupted for a short period of time than place the yoke of government with all of its inherent
intrusiveness, incompetence and intolerance into the medium which has become a vital and integral component of the modern lifestyle.
No, it is NOT better to ever disrupt any web functionality EVER. Also, no, the government doesn't even need to intrude to investigate disruptions,
it can be tested externally, legally.