Plain and simple: Net neutrality is hypocrisy

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703395204576023452250748540.html

by mudil • 16 years ago

20 25 16 years ago

online.wsj.com

Don't believe politicians? Take it from techies:

http://scripting.com/stories/2010/12/19/netNeutralityIsHypocrisy.html

guelo• 16 years ago

I know this is ad hominem, but Robert McDowell is one of many corporate lobbyists appointed by Bush to undermine a federal agency.

agentultra2• 16 years ago

It's not ad hominem; it's good to know sources, especially with an opinion piece like this.

yummyfajitas2• 16 years ago

It certainly is ad hominem.

- attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ad+hominem

It's also hard to see how it is relevant.

lazylland• 16 years ago

I don't get his arguments ... it just seemed like one big REGULATION IS EVIL rant/FUD.

Did I miss anything ?

stupidsignup3• 16 years ago

Nope, you did not miss anything. There is not a single argument in the whole piece. But hey, what do you expect from a Republican?

Hey, just got down voted by a Republican. That's a special honor. Keep it coming.

anonymoushn2• 16 years ago

I don't think we should make this about elephant corporatist shills vs. donkey corporatist shills.

RyanMcGreal• 16 years ago

> Did I miss anything?

No. There's regulation and there's regulation. Net neutrality is the concept that network providers should not privilege some kinds of content over others - i.e. that all packets are created equal.

nazgulnarsil3• 16 years ago

I don't think net neutrality legislation means what you think it means.

government regulation with regards to ISP's is broken, thus stifling the competition that would ensure far more robust net neutrality than any legislated version.

you don't stop monopolies from abusing their powers by legislating that they play fair. you take away the governmental protections that allow them to have a monopoly and let the market consume them when they refuse to change their shitty business practices.

Lendal• 16 years ago

Let's put it a way a programmer would understand. Regulation is like generalization. Not enough of it is bad. Too much of it is also bad.

What is the problem we're having that's in need of fixing? If you can't answer that question with concrete examples of problems we are having right now, that would be fixed by adding expensive lawyers and regulators, then it is an imaginary problem. Regulation is not necessary. Regulation costs money. Do we have an overabundance of money right now to fix imagined problems that nobody can explain? I sure don't.

frobozz• 16 years ago

When faced with a prompt: "Input a number from 1 to 5", a tester asks "What if I put in 6?". One possible answer might be: "The program crashes."

In this situation, there is no problem with the program right now, only at some hypothetical point in the future when someone actually enters an invalid value.

RockyMcNuts2• 16 years ago

regulation is like optimization ... can be the root of all evil if done prematurely... or necessary to do useful work.

(I would add - the problem that exists right now is companies like Comcast want to start taxing companies like Netflix and Google)

regularfry• 16 years ago

Let me get this straight: nothing is broken right now, and therefore legislation to stop it from being broken in the future is... bad? Is that seriously what he's suggesting?

mudil• 16 years ago

That's right. Ronald Reagan liked to describe the sequence of actions that government typically takes toward private business:

"If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it."

RockyMcNuts2• 16 years ago

The thing is, in most locations broadband is a monopoly.

Show me the competition, innovation, and capital investment in the last mile, and I'll consider your argument that regulation will stifle innovation, competition, and capital investment.

Netflix is a good example... show me that even with all your advantages and investment in view on demand, you were able to deliver a customer experience as good as Netflix, and I'll consider your argument that you should help determine what services to offer and how to charge for them.

bumbledraven• 16 years ago

I like what Stephen Kinsella wrote in response to this article in "Against Net Neutrality" http://networkedblogs.com/c3MxZ):

``It is true that some corporations probably have extra-market power to control aspects of the Internet, as the result of state interventions such as IP, FCC licensing, antitrust law, big business favoritism, and so on. But the solution is not to grant the state even more power to regulate private companies... [N]et neutrality is an attempt by the state to [seize] more power to control private property rights as an ostensible response to various "market failures" that are really themselves caused by state intervention.''

Plain and simple: Net neutrality is hypocrisy

Related Stories