Net neutrality is the principle that internet service providers should treat all data on the internet equally. Proponents of net neutrality laws argue that they balance the rights and duties of individuals, governments and corporations, while ensuring that the Internet continues to be an open and decentralized network. Opponents include internet companies who complain that the law would increase their costs and create barriers to the free flow of information.
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
No, treat all traffic equally and continue the openness of the internet
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
No, this would allow them to remove competition, create artificial scarcity, and increase prices
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
Yes, this would make the internet faster and more reliable for users
@JonBSimConstitution2yrs2Y
It might disrupt the dark web, used by hundreds or thousands, for the sake of clean and public sites used by thousands upon thousands.
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
Yes
@9FSRVRJIndependent8mos8MO
The overall popularity of a website determining the speed it can be accessed would be very detrimental. Many utilities, mortgages and bills are paid online, but the act could be slowed dramatically if browsing speed is correlated to popularity of a website. Many free websites such as Wikipedia and dictionary.com could potentially become so slow they are impossible to use.
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
Yes, only if it’s strictly based on a pay-per-quality model
@9FSRVRJIndependent8mos8MO
The best counter argument to my opinion is that in a capitalist society the more popular company is the dominant source. If websites A, B, and C all have generally the same information in different ways the popularity is a key indicator of success. if B website is more popular is must be more successful at delivering their message. As a consequence websites A and C would not be favorable to visit so a decrease in availability matters less.
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
Yes, but only give priority by type (video over images) and not source (big website over little website)
Information is information regardless of format (images, videos, text, etc) and must be treated equally.
@9FSRVRJIndependent8mos8MO
I also do not support giving priority to certain types of media over others. Everybody learns at a different pace and in different ways, choosing which format types are "allowed" on the internet is a great disservice to internet users and takes away all incentive from being innovative and promotes conformity.
@4T2WTMM4yrs4Y
Internet should be a service like water, sewer and electric. Just another utility.
@53LH4W34yrs4Y
No. The internet should be treated as a utility like it is in other countries. Our access speed is much slower than other countries and it's embarrassing.
@97KSZBQ2yrs2Y
I think there are good arguments on both sides of this issue.
@8X843983yrs3Y
No, treat all traffic equally and continue the openness of the internet and this would allow them to remove competition, create artificial scarcity, and increase prices.
@8C7V6WW4yrs4Y
No, and make internet access a public utility
@9H7ZNLMIndependent6mos6MO
No, this would not only allow the popular websites to remove their competition, but they create artificial scarcity and increase prices. Internet traffic should be treated equally and that way it can continue the openness of the internet.
@99MFTPG1yr1Y
No, and the government should have more control over internet content
@99JL6W81yr1Y
No they should just be free
@8GCLT5S4yrs4Y
If a website is more visited, the connection should be sped up.
@8SQXRQG3yrs3Y
No, but the government shouldn’t regulate this
@8CW98CL4yrs4Y
Throttling data speeds intentionally should come with a fine.
@8R9PNM33yrs3Y
The market place has shown Net Neutrality to non-relevant because technology has resolved the issues with speed. Government involvement has shown continually shows its ignorance and only wishes to obtain governance and power.
@9LF6M8N2mos2MO
Proponents of net neutrality laws argue that they balance the rights and duties of individuals, governments and corporations, while ensuring that the Internet continues to be an open and decentralized network.
@9L9XD9J2mos2MO
Yes, they should speed up access to popular websites but they shouldn't slow down access to less popular websites
@9L5ZP752mos2MO
Everyone should have the same speedy accesses to websites if possible. Why? Because it may be really important that someone accesses a website faster than slow even if its a small website.
@9KKPGYK3mos3MO
They should be allowed to because they are private companies, but they should have to be transparent about it.
@9KK5CLK3mos3MO
Yes, but only because they should be able to have that right and if they are a private company. Not that this is something I agree with.
@9KH7ZYH3mos3MO
Internet service providers are private companies that can do whatever they want. Personally, I think that the internet should be open and unrestricted and it would be unfair to slow down some websites but it makes a lot of sense to speed up the service to high traffic sites so that everyone can use sites that are used frequently without any hiccups. It makes sense and I don't think it's a big problem. It shouldn't be legally enforced. Let the companies decide what is best for them.
@9JXVC9R3mos3MO
Get rid of patents so that ISPs can become more decentralized, to increase competition and ruin any chance of a cartel being able to outcompete the guy who doesn't slow access to websites. Theoretically, paying higher rates for faster speeds seems good until you realize ISPs can profit anyways without throttling their own services. It's like gimping a car you already made and selling it for cheaper, you didn't reduce costs, you made a mistake.
@9FFG9HR8mos8MO
Internet service providers should be able to do what's within the power of their contract with the websites.
@9FDZ2TT8mos8MO
Depends how much faster they're made and if its proportional
@lane07689 9mos9MO
The internet, like the economy, should be fixed in a way that wouldn't prompt this as a question.
No, and create a free, nationalized ISP service to ensure people in even the most remote locations have access to reliable internet and phone services
@9DQKBWL9mos9MO
I believe it is fine the way it currently is.
@9DLCB2C9mos9MO
The government should have no involvement
@9DGTWK59mos9MO
Yes, the government should let the free market run its course
@9D5Z9HH10mos10MO
Yes, and require transparency so that the market drives customers to corporations without this practice
No, and nationalize the sector
@9D37HS310mos10MO
Yes, but if only it is extremely clearly advertised.
I support net neutrality.
Deleted10mos10MO
No, and nationalize the industry to prevent it from happening
@9CXLYPF10mos10MO
The government should not be intervening in something that is a private company's affairs.
@9C7TGZM12mos12MO
it depends on what it can do for me.
No, and nationalize all internet service providers and unionize the workers
@99VTR3Z1yr1Y
Yes as long as they are upholding the contract with the customers using the data
@99SWVWB1yr1Y
Depends on the intentions of the company and the relationship the company has with the website owners. Website owners should have control over their sites according to traffic for the community, and the company should want what is best for the website owners by decreasing traffic in high-traffic areas.
@99SKF6LLibertarian1yr1Y
Yes, and government should not interfere
@84ZWD6LLibertarian1yr1Y
No, and classify internet as a utility
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
