-
Website
http://techliberation.com/ -
Original page
http://techliberation.com/2008/09/02/opposing-viewpoints-on-network-neutrality/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
MikeRT
184 comments · 6 points
-
eee_eff
800 comments · 8 points
-
mwendy
73 comments · 2 points
-
Ryan Radia
176 comments · 5 points
-
Richard Bennett
612 comments · 1 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
The Ugliness of Privacy Notices
3 days ago · 4 comments
-
Google’s Privacy Dashboard: Another Major Step Forward in User Empowerment & Transparency
2 days ago · 2 comments
-
Open Source is Not the Enemy
4 days ago · 3 comments
-
Broadband as a Human Right (and a short list of other things I am entitled to on your dime)
3 weeks ago · 18 comments
-
“Internet Freedom”: How Statists Corrupt Our Language
1 week ago · 7 comments
-
The Ugliness of Privacy Notices
In any event, it's clear that more regulation isn't necessary. Some combination of market forces and the threat of regulatory intervention is making broadband incumbents behave themselves. I'm not entirely comfortable with the second half of that equation, but either way, enacting formal regulations has considerable downsides and no real upside.
I actually think the best thing we can do for net neutrality (as a desired goal but fearful of government's hand) is to have dedicated activists like Save the Internet dual with smart responders like you guys at Cato. Though the sustainability of that is questionable...
So you essentially do agree with the principle of net neutrality, but you don't think that it is necessary to implement at the moment because it hasn't been violated yet. On one hand, I'd like to see a preventative solution to make sure there is no lasting damage done if it finally does occur. On the other hand, it's pretty easy to over-regulate or miss something when we don't know exactly how net neutrality will be violated.
"filtering and blocking tools network providers do have are clumsy and easily circumvented. There are plenty of people monitoring broadband providers’ behavior, and they will ensure that any network neutrality violations get widely publicized."
Let's not get stuck in the bubble here. Most people don't even know that filtering exists or what net neutrality is. The "publicity" that violations will generate will only reach people who have been following the debate or happened to catch a very simplified explanation of net neutrality on a Youtube video. One thing I don't know enough about, though: was there a huge consumer backlash against Comcast for its filtering? The web certainly had its share of debate, but I don't recall it being something the mainstream new about.
Network neutrality the technical principle was "implemented" back in the 1980s. I think the record so far suggests that non-regulatory forces will be sufficient to preserve it.
One thing I don't know enough about, though: was there a huge consumer backlash against Comcast for its filtering? The web certainly had its share of debate, but I don't recall it being something the mainstream new about.
Well, obviously it got the most attention among customers who use BitTorrent and techies who are paying close attention to the debate. Since most mainstream users don't use BitTorrent, they didn't pay much attention. But this is precisely why I think more ambitious attempts at network discrimination will get more attention. if Comcast tried to block something that most people do use, like YouTube, CNN, or World of Warcraft, you'd see a proportionately bigger public backlash.