potato_sulad

It doesn't matter if you are for net neutrality or not. Either side has its downsides. If you have read any posts supporting NET neutrality, listen to this. Net neutrality will give control to the government over rules for the internet which limits severely what isps can do (which is mostly good). But, the government will have to setup an institution to manage this and make sure isps aren't breaking rules and creating loopholes. This is going to cost us, taxpayers. Also, net neutrality will limit the ability of isps to grow, so they'd have no motivation to expand or introduce fibre optic connections that we should already have at this point in time. Unfortunately, if we let the government control the internet, it won't be anything like it is today, in 30 years. Laws will be passed RESTRICTING the internet. That's just not how it was designed to be. It was made like the wild west, so there is no real control about what goes on on it. On the other hand, if net neutrality didn't pass, isps like timewarner, Comcast, and at&t would have full control over whether or not they wanted so called 'speed lanes' which would slow down or speed up connections to certain websites. Now, I'm not trying to sway you one way or another, but before you make a decision, please consider what I've said.

Do you want the internet like it is today, with isps having control?

Or do you want the government to have insight and control on it?

Thank you for correcting me. But, you can't deny that what I've said will happen. I'm simply trying to put a relatively neutral view out there and let people know what is going to happen if net neutrality is or isn't passed.