What the FCC's decision on net neutrality means

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Itsjstmeagain Merritt Island, Fl
    May 20, 2014 4:02 p.m.

    If these industries want a faster, dedicated fast lane then allow them to build and install their own parallel to current networks and they pay for it themselves. The only drawback is local internet providers would need to allow their data to merge with the current internet service closest to their addressee but under current Net Neutrality rules.
    Read "Flash Boys" for an understanding of the idea.

  • cmsense Kaysville, UT
    May 18, 2014 7:22 a.m.

    I wasn't sure what to think for awhile but after reading pro and con arguments I definitly believe in net neutrality. If people are already spending extra to get broadband and comcast etc are already making billions, why should they be able to slow down or just make the big players like netflix or google pay billions more for preferential treatment, so a small internet players who can't afford preferential treatment are put on unequal playing field? Do we really want a have and have not internet? I"ve already paid for the broadband so why should comcast etc be able to degrade my experience on some websites and enhance it on others making it harder for startups to compete.

    Also the cost of netflix will go up when the cost is passed on to us so we end up paying comast twice even if our overall use isn't any more.

    Serioiusly, If I pay for broadband I should be able to access whatever content I want with the bandwith I signed up for.

    In most areas there is usually only one broadband provider so I think they should be regulated like a utility.

  • AZKID Mapleton, UT
    May 16, 2014 11:09 p.m.

    Why are we having a 3-2 vote from five people? Five people! Wouldn't this be something that our elected representatives in Congress should be debating and voting on instead? Why do we allow unaccountable bureaucrats to decide on something this important?

    Isn't Congress there to do the people's business and make the laws that govern us according to principles in the constitution? This is certainly a law regulating interstate commerce if there ever was one.

    I would love to see something like this debated--I mean really debated--on CSPAN instead of the typical partisan drivel and posturing that masquerades as debate.

    Give me some good, old-fashioned debate, where thorny issues are debated and intelligent arguments can win the day by influencing others and swaying opinions.