Net neutrality

[Virginiá]

This country will be a full-on oligarchic dystopia soon. It's already well on its way.

It's ok, while repealing these rules is certainly bad and might lead to some unsavory behavior from the ever-consolidating telecoms, it also is worth noting that we'd simply be back to where we were around pre-2015, minus the weaker NN rules that were struck down (and thus led to Title II). It will also be harder for ISPs to start screwing people with the exact kind of behavior net neutrality proponents have been ringing the bell about, as it is more widely known than before.

In the end, since there has been no legislation forbidding net neutrality rules (yet), once Republicans are booted from the White House, a new Democratic administration can reinstate Title II. I'm just fine keeping this up until the telecoms/conservatives relent, because this is non-negotiable (imo).

[Virginiá]

Is there any evidence media companies were actually doing that, though? There's never been any difficulty finding left wing subversive content on the web and the big companies could have been doing this all along if they wanted to.

The only thing net "neutrality" does is enable the government/FCC to do things like that since they're the ones who define what constitutes "neutrality" with no possibility for judicial review if I recall correctly. So if you don't think the way the FCC is administering this stuff is neutral you can't sue them. With Trump of all people in charge of the executive branch you'd think that would be the last thing the left would want.

But this has already happened to varying degrees. This is from Wiki:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Also, something not covered by net neutrality rules is ISPs instituting data caps then exempting certain services from said caps, which has the effect of driving users to those services because they don't count against their artificially-low data caps. I mean that really works out for the ISPs - they institute data caps that are completely arbitrary, then exempt their favored services, possibly because they've gotten kickbacks or other treats from those businesses/services. Charging your competitors extra money or flat out throttling their access to their networks is the logical next step, and arguably was the first step, but was limited by law for a short time.

Everything the telecoms have become and everything they continue to do and push for indicates they will abuse the internet in the ways people have warned about. These are not benevolent companies by any means. If they had no intention of not pursuing such strategies down the road, I don't think they'd have fought tooth and nail against net neutrality restrictions.

[Virginiá]

Can Restoring Net Neutrality be a major legislative plank for Democrats in 2018-2024?

No, not really. People generally don't care about more nuanced issues like that in a way that makes it politically potent. People care about "the economy" and "healthcare" and so on. It's not to say people don't support net neutrality - I'd guess the vast majority of people support those principles, it is just not something that is going to generate excitement outside of a limited subset of the population.

Democrats would do better to make this a smaller talking point in relation to a broader "corporate crackdown" strategy, where they argue against runaway corporate power, monopolies, and so on. That is something that can rile people up. Or, at least more so than net neutrality alone.

[Virginiá]

Ajit Varadaraj Pai was first appointed to the FCC by Obama. Pathetic.

Didn't he have to appoint 2 Republicans? I think the law actually states only 3 members may be from the same political party. Of the numerous things to rightfully dump on Obama for, I don't really think this is one of them.