|
|
|
|
|
by thomastjeffery
3123 days ago
|
|
Net Neutrality is like preventing the Post Office from limiting the amount of packages a business can deliver, or limiting the priority of that business's deliveries unless that business pays the Post Office a premium. The problem with that behavior is that there are some very large, wealthy businesses like Amazon who need to deliver a high volume of packages on time, so those businesses would be willing to pay a very high premium. Since the Post Office would be making such deals with everyone, so that they don't look like they are being unfair, the big deals they make with Amazon would set the bar for every business who wants their packages delivered by the Post Office. That bar would naturally be too high for small businesses and nonprofits, who would quickly go out of business, or be unable to start in the first place. |
|
The reason this doesn't goes terribly is that there is business competition between the Post Office and FedEx, DHL, etc.
The problem with the internet is not the lack of neutrality, it's the lack of competition between ISP.
And you assume that small businesses will be kept out. I see the exact opposite happening in Europe where net neutrality is more lax. Small startups are making agreements with ISPs to provide services that need a level of QoS that wouldn't be possible with net neutrality in place.