Make no mistake though, today’s decision is going to affect you in more ways than you can imagine both personally and professionally. In many ways the world has changed in an instant…
the definition of hyperbole
Hyperbole definition, obvious and intentional exaggeration. See more.
For example, Verizon may charge subscribers an extra fee to access Amazon, decide to block Fox programming, and speed up Yahoo! (which they now own).
Of course, if they do that, they’d lose all the subscribers that use those services. So they won’t.
We have now seemingly moved one step closer towards Internet censored nations like China.
See above definition of “hyperbole”. Add to that this definition:
the definition of prevarication
Prevarication definition, the act of prevaricating, or lying: Seeing the expression on his mother's face, Nathan…
Net neutrality enabled the government, for the first time, to regulate the internet. So, although there is no indication that the pro-NN lemmings wanted that to happen, internet censorship by the government was actually MORE likely with NN than without, where today, like back in 2015, the government has nothing on the books that allows them to interfere with the Internet.
Now if one of a handful of internet or wireless service providers disagree with a political belief or stance they can make it more difficult if not impossible to to access all the information you need on a daily basis.
Chuckles. If you were a conservative, you’d realize that the most likely scenario under which this might occur is a liberal administration that has internet control. Do we all remember the first Administration who tried to penalize a news organization for their political stances?
Administration Loses Bid to Exclude Fox News From Pay Czar Interview
The Obama administration on Thursday tried to make pay czar Kenneth Feinberg available for interviews to every member…
Ever wonder what it’s like to live in North Korea which only distributes state-run news? Let’s hope we never need to find out the hard way.
Best way to not find out is a free and open internet without the government involved. Censorship is not in the best financial interests of an ISP. Censorship IS, however, in the best interests of politicians, which is why we don’t want their hands on our internet.
Because Netflix has 128M subscribers to Hulu’s 32M. If they were to throttle Netflix to benefit Hulu, they would lose more subscribers than Hulu would gain.
I would have thought that would be obvious.
Are you subjected to dial-up streaming speeds? Forced to pay more? In either scenario the consumer loses. Why would Google’s new streaming service allow any online video property besides YouTube to flourish? Can ABC which is a major advertiser use its spending leverage to stamp out upstarts like Bleacher Report which compete with ESPN? Will Wikipedia just vanish because they have intentionally not created a commercial model?
Same argument. The basis of profit for any provider is subscribers. Anything they do that would cost them subscribers costs them more money then they are likely to gain.
However, in all your hyperventilation, you’ve touched upon another issue, that being of what happens if any of these organizations (Comcast, ABC, Verizon, whoever) actually does engage in any of these practices.
Obviously, the remedy, if your ISP is doing something shitty to you, it to change ISP’s. If ALL ISP’s are doing shitty things to their subscribers, that’s OK too; because now you have a Sherman Act case that could be advanced. And that’s another reason why your nuclear scenarios are unlikely to happen; the last thing that any of these megacompanies want to have happen is for anyone to use the terms “monopolistic practice” or “collusion” in their presence.
I think you’re making a very good case as to why some of these megaproviders that own all these services should be broken up, and laws passed that keep companies from owning multiple types of services. That would be the real disease.
Net neutrality, OTOH, is like taking Advil for pain caused by a brain tumor. If you have a problem with monopolistic practices, then use the Sherman Act to fix it.