Is Steven Crowder Being Purposely Wrong About Net Neutrality?



Steven's analogy to the postal service is the most apt in this video. It removes the Title II designation, preventing the FCC from putting tough net neutrality rules in place even if it wanted to. And, it turns out, the Republicans now in charge of the FCC really don't want to. The new rules largely don't prevent internet providers from doing anything.

On the contrary , net neutrality prevents ISPs from favoring one service over the other, the way Microsoft favors its own products by including them in their operating system instead of competing products. Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are in the customer service business.

Were letting you finance phones instead now and you just have to switch this this plan so you still save money” then they proceed to slowly fuck the customers over by upping the costs of service while forfeiting all competition of discounting phones.

The battle between state governments and federal governments will increase as blue states believe that they are protecting the Internet by reinstating net neutrality regulations. I bet that when google fiber came in, the other ISPs suddenly had to up their game because they knew that consumers with a choice don't have to tolerate the bad service any more.

@Robert Webber - I'm not claiming that ISPs are in no way correlated with the internet, I'm explaining the distinction between ISP regulations and internet regulations. But the analogy is incomplete; thanks to its quasi-governmental role, people more or less expect Congress to control USPS policy.

ISPs already add various charges and fees, all net neutrality does is prevent them from selectively manipulating internet content; whether they charge fees pertaining to throttling or not is irrelevant, charging fees for faster speeds is just one example of how throttling is implemented in other countries without net neutrality.

These people are supporting more government control to try to solve a problem of government control. -The 1996 telecom act is not when Title II net neutrality was implemented, the 1996 act is where the first internet provider rules were implemented which were later updated in 2003.

Net Neutrality” has all the hallmarks of an Obama policy: a lack of transparency throughout the process, a glossy public relations campaign that seeks to mask the reality of the proposal, and guarantees that, if successful, the government's hand will reach ever-further into Americans' lives.

Net neutrality is what the web has had since its inception and this had been further enforced in 2010 , when The new regulations in 2015 were passed to help ensure net neutrality would be enforced, and that ISPs would not be allowed to throttle or block specific websites, nor charge others extra for access to their users.

If people are surfing myspace for only an hour at night, and are watching low resolution cat videos in a quarter web page, providers can make some reasonable assumptions and charge users appropriately. As Ben Shapiro wrote in 2014, Consumers would dump those ISPs in favor of others” if those ISPs slowed down or blocked data as favoritism toward certain sites.

They are monopolies because the municipal governments generally do not allow multiple players to use the same right-of-way to lay networking infrastructure, which results in a substantial cost Steven Crowder Net Neutrality disparity for new entrants, if it doesn't completely prevent those new entrants from providing service at all.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Comments on “Is Steven Crowder Being Purposely Wrong About Net Neutrality?”

Leave a Reply

Gravatar