

Reddit incredulity at Net Neutrality support by Americans - clp16
http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/eujm2/only_one_out_of_five_american_voters_supports_net/

======
TomOfTTB
I think Net Neutrality is a complicated debate and this depresses me because
it's obvious the pro-net neutrality side is avoiding the counter argument by
assuming the other side is just stupid.

Just to state it outright that counter argument is: The FCC regulates TV and
Radio to keep it from "harming" the consumer. The FCC would be doing the same
with net neutrality. But once you establish a precedent of "the FCC can
regulate internet providers to prevent what they perceive as harm to the
consumer" you open the floodgates.

We saw this just recently with Wikileaks. The only difference was the Federal
Government went after hosts because they couldn't legally demand ISP's block
the traffic. But the government clearly felt Wikileaks was harmful to the
nation (many senators said that outright).

Once you establish the FCC as the arbiter of "harm" on the Internet they are
free to block whatever they need to. Wikileaks, Porn, whatever.

Now of course there is a valid counter argument that almost everyone on HN
knows. The above theory revolves around the free market being able to regulate
itself and that's hard to do when there's very little competition. How can the
free market regulate itself with competition if the only competition is a
phone monopoly and a cable monopoly?.

But the debate is weighing the ineffectiveness of competition vs the danger of
regulation and that's not a no-brainer question. The lack of support for net
neutrality in that poll is, IMHO, a direct result of those in favor of it
assuming people who don't immediately agree with them are stupid and not
bothering to make the case to them.

~~~
Bud
It seems to me that this particular counter-argument fails, because the
floodgates are already open. We've seen this with recent federal action to
shut down various domains, without a warrant, and certainly without any kind
of due process.

If the gov't is going to nuke domains on a whim anyway, I don't think that
some general fantasy about preventing general gov't interference with the net
is a good reason to oppose net neutrality. At all.

Nor do I find the argument about "free markets" compelling. In this case, I
suspect the free market is likely to find ways to take more money from
consumers, rather than protecting consumers by maintaining the net the way
it's been for the last couple decades.

~~~
TomOfTTB
Two points here.

= On the floodgates already being opened I'd ask this question: Did the Senate
Succeed in blocking Wikileaks? Yes they played bully with a few private
companies but in the end they failed because they didn't have the tools to
chase Wikileaks to another country.

Give the government control over the ISPs and they'll have the tools to block
anything on the Internet without having to leave the U.S. to do it.

= On the case of Free Markets you have to understand Free Markets never try to
protect consumers. That's not the point. The point is to make money. But
there's always some corporation that's behind in the market. So companies
motivated by greed act in a way that protects consumers in spite of their
intentions.

Take Net Neutrality. Say AT&T is so dominant in California that they decide to
put a surcharge on iTunes purchases. Time Warner who is not dominant then sees
an opportunity. By not putting the same surcharge they make MORE MONEY because
they'll get an influx of customers from AT&T. Then AT&T has to either ditch
the surcharge or lose most of their iTunes buying customers.

------
Bud
Headline should perhaps read:

"Reddit incredulity at LACK of Net Neutrality support by Americans"

(Given that only 1 in 5 Americans do support it, according to the linked
page.)

------
avree
I don't see much incredulity here. The first and second comments explain it
well : "Well the question they asked was "Should the Federal Communications
Commission regulate the Internet like it does radio and television?" I think
it more has to do with a tricky question and voters being less aware about the
issue."

------
jellicle
If you ask the question, "Should the Federal Communications Commission
regulate the Internet like it does radio and television?"

then the public's answer is "no".

If you ask the question, "Should the government stop my phone and cable
companies from screwing me?"

then the public's answer is "yes".

It's all in the framing of the question.

