2017
Next Season
I find it interesting that a company that has a FIRST and a Double Gold which basically charges extra for quicker services wants the government to prevent ISPs from doing the same thing. ISPs invest tremendous amounts of money into infrastructure and then when it comes time to profit off of those investments the government steps in and declares their product a "utility" and thus regulate it. The end result of net neutrality will be less capital investment by ISPs which will result in worse internet access not better. But at least it will suck the same for everyone.
last time I checked not having FIRST doesn't affect your internet speed or video buffer rate, it only grants access to certain first-only content.
Double gold is a box service? What are you on about?
Okay, maybe I stretched the comparison between net neutrality and RT FIRST, however my point is that whenever you have the government involved a product gets worse not better and having the government regulating internet speeds will means that everyone will eventually have the same crappy service. But hey! At least we'll all be equal. And don't tell me about the government provided internet that country's the size of Connecticut provide their citizens until you are willing to accept their tax rates.
I know that I may be the only anti net neutrality voice you may be hearing, but think if you really think it's a good idea to have the government involved in your internet service.
Join the conversation! Log in to post a comment.