The sad thing is that only a minority voted for this, but it will negatively affect the vast majority.

I don't think it will have a global effect since most governments around the world are still clinically sane.

Who do you think the data is going through when it's moving from American companies to their global customers? And who do you think are going to pay for the increased costs of those companies? American customers only? Of course this won't affect datacenters outside the United States, and the funny thing is, at worst (for the US), this might even result in even more datacenters being located outside the US in the future.

Hopefully this'll be the catalyst for revolution that we needed! Unfortunately, it'll probably be a slow process that makes it less noticeable, and as a result people will get pissed off but adapt to it begrudgingly.

You might not understand the initial goal of the ISPs here. It's mostly about lowering and prioritizing bandwidth of end consumers, i.e. US citizens. They won't constrict bandwidth to the datacenters. To get more money from companies for increasing bandwidth to their premises they don't need this ruling. They can do this whenever they want, even with net neutrality in place. That's what contracts are for.

Any company who cares about international traffic will have datacenters across the world anyway. So even if US ISPs reduce bandwidth from every IP that does not originate in their network, it won't have any effect for anyone else but US citizens. Also they will have to deal with the beef from directly connected ISPs.

Well the young douchebag Pai might have high ambitions.  Who knows?  Perhaps after pushing this through he will become the CEO of Comcast or Charter/Spectrum (formerly Time Warner) in the following years.

Verizon.

(Wiki) "Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers and governments regulating the Internet should treat all data on the Internet the same, not discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or mode of communication."

Could someone tell me what a worst case scenario could look like?
In my head I just thought, if all the providers go to shit, don't you think others would pop up and compete with them, eventually giving the customer decent deals regardless? Am I just being naive? :o

Well the cable companies have a monopolies on the USA market divided up among the cities.  Sure there are smaller cable providers here and there but it is usually a choice between one major cable company and AT&T for internet.  I view this a push just so they can try and milk some money from big streamers like Netflix and Hulu because they have been losing customers over the past few years.  This would be also a good way to knock down Sling TV which seems to just be gathering steam.  They can't win the battle of cord cutters and people sick of their shit TV plans so they have to win it any other means possible.

Ah, right, the monopolies. Despite Sweden loving monopolies so much, we still have a pretty decent selection to pick from when it comes to internet. I didn't consider this. If this all goes through, they'd probably clamp down even harder on their monopolies then, right?

You're supposed to offer a better service to bring back your customers, not just kill the competition :C

I'm wondering who will do the BS first. That triggers a revolt. This could cause Netflix to start losing a lot of subscribers. Than it starts causing more problems down the line.