“Net Neutrality” supporters will tell you their plan will “free the internet,” but nothing could be further from the truth.
“Neuters” are worried broadband providers might privilege certain types of internet traffic and charge higher fees for competing services. Musicians are afraid MTV might pay more than BET to stream the latest booty-shaking video online. Comcast and Time Warner only want to compete against each other to show the newest on-demand movie with the hottest actress taking her shirt off, not the underlying carrier.
According to the neuters it would unfair to charge more for better service and it’s discrimination to charge the communication giants of a free-market open source internet community competitive rates.
Only if you like sitting in traffic (HOT lanes and HOV lanes are biased), waiting in long lines at the grocery store (express lanes be damned) and letting the government control traffic (doesn’t the Capitol Visitor Center look nice?) is their plan is for you.
Should all websites entitled to be treated equally? Is the key to life, liberty and happiness an internet connection that won’t let you access your online bank account any faster than a three-year old hammering away on barneysworld.com?
No. (Although the free-market has been pretty successful in giving it to you anyway).
You’ve heard of road rage, but if the neuters get their way, be prepared for internet rage. Finger splints will go out of stock due to a surge of broken fingers from impatient people pounding their keyboards. Maybe rush hour will disappear since everyone will still be stuck at work trying to get into their email accounts.
Google, the company that lectures “Don’t Be Evil” and has already agreed to filter content to the benefit of Communist China. They are also teaming up in this campaign with Yahoo! that compromised with Communist China to prosecute a journalist for divulging state secrets.
Is it too much to ask of them not to be neutral either?