Jason
Lv 6
Jason asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 9 years ago

Why do Conservatives ignore the truth about Net Neutrality?

I've heard this tired story so many times, it makes me ill:

"Obama wants to silence dissent, so he's doing the Net Neutrality to take away our Freedom!"

Do any of you know what Net Neutrality actually means?

Net Neutrality would do literally nothing to regulate web content. It would only prevent Internet Service Providers from arbitrarily blocking or throttling legal, non-disruptive web traffic or from engaging in quality-based price discrimination (ie. paying a premium to access certain pages).

Now, when I mention this, they always chime in with, "What's wrong with the Internet the way it is now? Why do we need this new Net Neutrality thing if everything is fine already?"

1. Net Neutrality used to be the unwritten law of the Internet. Back when everything was dial-up, ISPs were bound by the same Common Carrier regulations to which phone companies are subject. The same used to be true of DSL, but AT&T and Verizon convinced Congress to drop Common Carrier regulations on DSL since it did not apply to their main competitor, Comcast Broadband.

2. Everything is not "fine" now. ISPs interfere with their customer's connections to competing services. AT&T and Verizon degrade Vonage connectivity to support their own interests as phone companies. Comcast, in collusion with Microsoft, is waging a war against Open Source Software by attempting to kill BitTorrent, the means by which a majority of Open Source Software is legally obtained.

Seriously, can you not see that the GOP is trying to sell you out to the Telecoms? Is it truly that hard to fathom/believe?

Update:

How_Would_I_Know:

You are so wrong, I don't even know where to begin.

"Your view is obviously tainted by the liberal entitlement mentality. You want everything free, and you don't care who actually ends up having to pay for it."

Wrong.

I pay good money for my Internet access, I don't feel some stuffed shirt at Comcast has any right to tell me what web content I can/cannot access.

"A business which invests billions of dollars creating the infrastructure should be allowed to have control over THEIR PROPERTY."

They do have control over their property (the network), they've chose to use it to sell Internet access to others. That does not give them the right to control MY PROPERTY (my computer) or the property of content providers.

"If you don't like their business practices, you are free to find another service or even build your own."

That's a f#cking laugh. I live in Comcast's regional monopoly. There is no other service.

As for building my own service, do you have any frea

Update 2:

...king clue how much start-up cap it would take just to build the network Infrastructure for a competing ISP? There's a reason Comcast has a regional monopoly. Nobody can afford to build a competing network and stay in business. Comcast will under-cut them until they go out of business and then buy up their assets.

Trust me, I've seen it happen. That's precisely what happened to our old Cable/Internet Company, Insight Media.

9 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago
    Best answer

    Anyone who says net neutrality will take away freedom is a moron or a liar.

  • 9 years ago

    Your view is obviously tainted by the liberal entitlement mentality. You want everything free, and you don't care who actually ends up having to pay for it.

    A business which invests billions of dollars creating the infrastructure should be allowed to have control over THEIR PROPERTY. If you don't like their business practices, you are free to find another service or even build your own.

  • schulz
    Lv 4
    3 years ago

    the way I heard it defined became that it may turn the internet from an leisure park right into a carnival the place you may desire to pay to get in and you may desire to pay to get on specific rides. i assume the argument is that by way of ensuring internet neutrality you forestall those information superhighway agencies from making a income a definite way. yet, that comprehensive enterprise kind sounds quite unlawful or a minimum of quite unethical. according to hazard i do no longer understand the way it relatively is meant to artwork, besides the incontrovertible fact that it looks like me making a action picture and placing it as much as be performed for unfastened and yet another dude showing up and charging money to get into my action picture. because of the fact if internet Neutrality isn't ensured, than an information superhighway service can value an extra value to allow you to get admission to Youtube or everywhere.

  • ed f
    Lv 7
    9 years ago

    I guess a lot of people are worried about more freedom being taken away by the government. Sometimes it is hard to understand the small print.

  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    "Seriously, can you not see that the GOP is trying to sell you out to the Telecoms? Is it truly that hard to fathom/believe?"

    Apparently they can not. It is easier just to say catchy phrases.

    The GOP is selling them (us) out to every major corporate interest that they can-health insurers, oil etc.

    And the Democrats are not much better.

    I used to get angry over such stupidity, but I am old now and don't have the energy.

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    Two things.

    1. I have never heard about this, (not saying that it isn't true, i have just never heard of it.)

    2. Your speaking a foreign language to me x_X

    Source(s): aubs
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    Im a conservative and I work for the phone company and I know exactly what it means

  • 9 years ago

    The GOP hates the truth on 95% of what they talk about.

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    I agree with you but it's not just the GOP.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.