Super Mario Bros. X Forums

What it is, and its history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality

So, there was a recent rule made which allows ISPs to offer faster services to those who can pay. This of course means that the internet is dead, and the first amendment is now null. Well, at least that's the general reaction I've seen as of late. Now, I'm all for a free and open internet, however, I sincerely do not believe allowing an ISP to have control over the speed of its connections to websites to be the end of the world. It may actually enable more competition since web developers would seek the ISP that offers the better service, the faster speed, and the lower price rather than continue the monopoly they already have.

Of course there is the burden on those who cannot afford to pay for fast speeds, though. For that, I believe more revisions should be made that can help these people started.

What's your take on the issue?

GhostHawk wrote:This of course means that the internet is dead, and the first amendment is now null.

Ah, people need to stop getting so bent out of shape whenever companies try to do something to the internet.

I think this is bad only because it would, like you said, put a burden on people that can't afford it. However, if current speeds aren't being affected, I don't see much of a problem with it.

Eh, we'll see what comes of this. I think net neutrality is fairly important but I'm not going to panic. We haven't not had it before, so it's not safe to say that this will be a really bad thing yet.

Pseudo-dino wrote:Eh, we'll see what comes of this. I think net neutrality is fairly important but I'm not going to panic. We haven't not had it before, so it's not safe to say that this will be a really bad thing yet.

I agree. I mean, it is important for all parts of the web to be accessible and it may or may not cause problems in the future however, nobody is really talking about the possible benefits of this new rule. Even if this were to enable ISPs to block websites all together because they disagree with what the site has to say, you can always find another ISP that will show the site.

There are some pretty glaring issues with this law's repealment, though. While you may say that "you can just find another ISP", that's easier said than done in the US, especially if the Comcast-Time Warner Cable merger goes through. That's a hell of a monopoly right there, and while no net neutrality may cause more competition in the long term, if Comcast decides that it doesn't like a specific website, a lot of people won't be able to access it for a while.

I do hope that it will create more competition, though, and that concept makes a lot of sense. I don't want to make any predictions either way this early on, though.