Honestly, the arguments against net nutrality are entirely valid and honest. The vote here is not just one of "can companies do X", it is a bill to define internet companies as a utility. When is the last time our power networks have gotten a good upgrade? What we need is not that, what we need is laws that enforce net nutrality and do it directly. Making internet a utility is not this, and will have the negative effects this person is saying. The internet will move at the speed of government with the passing of internet being a utility. Unless this is talking about a bill that does what I say above, in which case this guy is an idiot. Honestly, though, we don't even need net nutrality, we need enforced competition. It's bullshit that we have one or two choices of internet provider, and the federal government should be stepping end to end this cycle of lobbying for local governments to shut out start-ups and protect the existing networks. Once competition exists, true competition, net nutrality won't be an issue, because any company that tries to screw us over gets killed off. Secondly, if net neutrality actually does hold back speeds of some things, the companies that adopt it will do better and prove that it isn't good to fight against anyway, without forcing us to adopt a system we do not want.
As kleinbl00 stated above, internet providers hold a natural monopoly because of the simple fact that they already are a utility company. They have built an established infrastructure and expecting a start-up company to come along and lay fiber-optic cable across the nation or launch a few dozen satellites into the exosphere is just downright unrealistic. Operating costs would price the Internet so far out of reach that most families would likely be unable to afford it. The effect would be a far more restrictive internet than we have today.Honestly, though, we don't even need net neutrality, we need enforced competition. It's bullshit that we have one or two choices of internet provider, and the federal government should be stepping end to end this cycle of lobbying for local governments to shut out start-ups and protect the existing networks.
They don't need fiber optic across the nation. Force the shared "hubs" of the networks to be open to companies, and allow regions to have their own, small, telecom providers. The reason there is no competition is because companies are legislated into having to provide coverage for entire regions. Startups have to smart small, current laws do not allow them to.They have built an established infrastructure and expecting a start-up company to come along and lay fiber-optic cable across the nation or launch a few dozen satellites into the exosphere is just downright unrealistic.