For some reason, I see people defending the decision to remove Net Neutrality. The decision to remove it will do much more than just split the internet up into different packages. ISPs will have much stricter control over what they want to with the internet and their consumers. With the removal of the act, ISPs can:
- Censor websites that don't align to their best interests
- Throttle the speed of websites who aren't partnered with them
- Make consumers pay for websites they aren't allied with so consumers are forced to use free websites that ISPs would be allied with
- Cripple the right for consumers to criticize whomever or whatever they please
- Force certain websites such as Netflix or Hulu to charge a surplus to account for the amount of money they would have to pay ISPs in order to avoid having their speeds throttled
If the FCC goes through with the decision, all the work that has been done by Americans since the 1990's will have been lost. If a future chair for the FCC wanted to get reinstate Net Neutrality, the process would be time consuming. The definition is of Net Neutrality is really hard to summarize and I intend to start a thread in a week or two that goes more in depth into the complexities of the act. With the removal of the act, corporations will have complete control over the internet without and federal intervention. Many people consider this a good thing, and would rather have businesses control them rather than their own federal government. Also, if the FCC does agree on the act, suggestions for the removal of Net Neutrality in countries such as Canada will be made and eventually passed. Nevertheless, Ajit Pai is a corporate shill that yielded to big money offered by the likes of Verizon, ATaT, erc. and will go down as one of the most hated men in America if he follows through with the decision.
